Ending Qualified Immunity Act
{{short description|Proposed United States legislation}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=June 2020}}
{{Infobox United States federal proposed legislation
|name=Ending Qualified Immunity Act
|acronym=
|fullname=To amend the Revised Statutes to remove the defense of qualified immunity in the case of any action under section 1979, and for other purposes.
|introducedby=Ayanna Pressley (D–MA)
|introducedin=House of Representatives
|introduced in the =117th
|number of co-sponsors=39
|introducedbill={{USBill|117|HR|1470}}
|introduceddate=March 1, 2021
|committees=House Committee on the Judiciary
}}
The Ending Qualified Immunity Act is a proposed United States Act of Congress introduced in 2020 by Justin Amash (L-Michigan) and Ayanna Pressley (D-Massachusetts) to end qualified immunity in the United States.{{USBill|116|HR|7085|which=116}}{{Cite web |last = Prignano |first = Christina |date = June 4, 2020 |title = Ayanna Pressley, Justin Amash introduce bill to end prohibition on lawsuits against police officers |url = https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/06/04/nation/ayanna-pressley-justin-amash-introduce-bill-end-prohibition-lawsuits-against-police-officers/ |access-date = June 17, 2020 |website = Boston Globe |language = en }}{{Cite web |last = Sibilla |first = Nick |title = New Bill Would Abolish Qualified Immunity, Make It Easier To Sue Cops Who Violate Civil Rights |date = June 3, 2020 |url = https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibilla/2020/06/03/new-bill-would-abolish-qualified-immunity-make-it-easier-to-sue-cops-who-violate-civil-rights/ |access-date = June 4, 2020 |website = Forbes |language = en }} Qualified immunity shields police officers and other government officials from being held personally liable for discretionary actions performed within their official capacity (even if those actions violate the civil rights of those affected) unless their actions violate "clearly established" federal law, a precedent requiring both that those actions violate written law and that there be a judicial precedent establishing that such actions are unlawful.{{Cite web |last = Millhiser |first = Ian |date = June 3, 2020 |title = Why police can violate your constitutional rights and suffer no consequences in court |url = https://www.vox.com/2020/6/3/21277104/qualified-immunity-cops-constitution-shaniz-west-supreme-court |access-date = June 4, 2020 |website = Vox |language = en }}{{Cite news |date = 2020-06-04 |title = U.S. lawmaker prepares bill aiming to end court protection for police |language = en |publisher = Reuters |first = David |last = Morgan |url = https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-police-congress-idUSKBN23831W |access-date = 2020-06-04 }}{{Cite web |last1 = Alpert |first1 = Seth W. |last2 = Stoughton |first2 = Jeffrey J. |last3 = Noble |first3= Geoffrey P. |date = 2020-06-03 |title = How to Actually Fix America's Police |url = https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/how-actually-fix-americas-police/612520/ |access-date = 2020-06-04 |website = The Atlantic |language = en-US }}
The bill was re-introduced in the 117th Congress by Rep. Pressley in the House of Representatives{{Cite journal |date=2021-03-01 |last1=Binion |first1=Billy |title=Ayanna Pressley Revives Justin Amash's Bill To End Qualified Immunity |url=https://reason.com/2021/03/01/ayanna-pressley-ending-qualified-immunity-act-justin-amash-ed-markey-elizabeth-warren/ |access-date=2021-05-25 |journal=Reason |language=en-US}}{{USBill|117|HR|1470|which=117}} and by Sen. Edward Markey in the Senate.{{USBill|117|S|492|which=117}}
History
The bill was introduced to the House of Representatives on June 2, 2020. In introducing the act, Amash explained:
This week, I am introducing the Ending Qualified Immunity Act to eliminate qualified immunity and restore Americans' ability to obtain relief when police officers violate their constitutionally secured rights. The brutal killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police is merely the latest in a long line of incidents of egregious police misconduct. This pattern continues because police are legally, politically, and culturally insulated from consequences for violating the rights of the people whom they have sworn to serve. That must change so that these incidents of brutality stop happening.
{{As of|2020|8|22|df=US}}, the Ending Qualified Immunity Act had 66 cosponsors, of whom Representative McClintock is the only Republican.{{Cite web |last = Amash |first = Justin |date = 2020-06-04 |title = Cosponsors - H.R.7085 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): To amend the Revised Statutes to remove the defense of qualified immunity in the case of any action under section 1979, and for other purposes. |url = https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/7085/cosponsors |access-date = 2020-06-26 |publisher = United States Congress }} The bill's sponsorship by members of the Libertarian, Republican, and Democratic parties makes it a tripartisan bill.{{cite web |last1=Binion |first1=Billy |date=June 11, 2020 |title=With 1 Republican Cosponsor, Rep. Justin Amash Gains Tripartisan Support To End Qualified Immunity |url=https://reason.com/2020/06/11/justin-amash-tom-mcclintock-republican-cosponsor-tripartisan-support-to-end-qualified-immunity/ |website=Reason |publisher=Reason |access-date=18 June 2020}}
Background
{{Main|Qualified immunity}}
Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine in United States federal law which shields government officials from being held personally liable for discretionary actions performed within their official capacity, unless their actions violate "clearly established" federal law—even if the victim's civil rights were violated.63C Am. Jur. 2d Public Officers and Employees § 314-15. The U.S. Supreme Court introduced the qualified immunity doctrine in 1967, originally with the rationale of protecting law enforcement officials from frivolous lawsuits and financial liability in cases where they acted in good faith in unclear legal situations.{{cite web|last=Schwartz|first=Joanna C.|date=2017|title=How Qualified Immunity Fails|url=https://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/Schwartz_1ki1sac4.pdf|access-date=February 26, 2020|work=The Yale Law Journal|publisher=Yale Law School}}{{cite news|last1=Chung|first1=Andrew|last2=Hurley|first2=Lawrence|last3=Botts|first3=Jackie|last4=Januta|first4=Andrea|last5=Gomez|first5=Guillermo|date=8 May 2020|title=For cops who kill, special Supreme Court protection|publisher=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-police-immunity-scotus/|quote=The increasing frequency of such cases has prompted a growing chorus of criticism from lawyers, legal scholars, civil rights groups, politicians and even judges that qualified immunity, as applied, is unjust. Spanning the political spectrum, this broad coalition says the doctrine has become a nearly failsafe tool to let police brutality go unpunished and deny victims their constitutional rights.}} Starting around 2005, courts increasingly{{citation needed|date=August 2020}} applied the doctrine to cases involving the use of excessive or deadly force by police, leading to widespread criticism that it, in the words of a 2020 Reuters report, "has become a nearly failsafe tool to let police brutality go unpunished and deny victims their constitutional rights".{{Cite news|last1=Chung|first1=Andrew|last2=Hurley|first2=Lawrence|last3=Botts|first3=Jackie|last4=Januta|first4=Andrea|last5=Gomez|first5=Guillermo|date=2020-05-30|title=Special Report: For cops who kill, special Supreme Court protection|language=en|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-police-immunity-scotus-specialrep-idUSKBN22K18C|access-date=2020-06-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200612051417/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-police-immunity-scotus-specialrep-idUSKBN22K18C|archive-date=2020-06-12}}