Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
No federal statute explicitly grants qualified immunity—it is a judicial precedent established by the Supreme Court. [41] While qualified immunity has been repeatedly affirmed by courts and legislation has established similar immunity at the state level, critics have argued that the adoption of qualified immunity in federal law amounts to ...
A U.S. district court initially ruled that High wasn't entitled to qualified immunity from Martinez's suit, writing that "it was clearly established that an officer sharing a domestic violence ...
Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court dealing with the doctrine of qualified immunity. [1]The case centered on the application of mandatory sequencing in determining qualified immunity as set by the 2001 decision, Saucier v.
The Supreme Court on June 28, 2024, ruled in favor of a participant in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot who challenged his conviction for a federal obstruction crime.
Presidential immunity is the concept that a sitting president of the United States has both civil and criminal immunity for their official acts. [a] Neither civil nor criminal immunity is explicitly granted in the Constitution or any federal statute. [1] [2] The Supreme Court of the United States found in Nixon v.
In an appeal of the federal charges, the Supreme Court ruled July 1 that former presidents are shielded from criminal charges for core functions of the job, such as vetoes or pardons ...
Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730 (2002), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the defense of qualified immunity, under which government actors may not be sued for actions they take in connection with their offices, did not apply to a lawsuit challenging the Alabama Department of Corrections's use of the "hitching post", a punishment whereby inmates were immobilized ...
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Trump can claim some immunity.