Following Renee Good’s death, Senator Ed Markey and Representative Ayanna Pressley are spearheading efforts to eliminate qualified immunity for federal law enforcement. They have updated the “Ending Qualified Immunity Act,” originally introduced five years prior, to allow victims to sue federal authorities for civil rights violations. This revised bill, targeting the 2026 legislative session, would remove the qualified immunity defense in such lawsuits. Senator Markey emphasized the urgency of the matter, citing concerns about impunity in cases involving federal agents.
Read More
Legal experts and officials refuted Vice President Vance’s claim that federal immigration agent Jonathan Ross had “absolute immunity” after fatally shooting Renee Good, emphasizing that no such legal precedent exists. Despite footage showing conflicting instructions given to Good and her car moving just before the shooting, Vance, along with other administration figures, blamed Good and blocked state investigations. Experts like Robert Bennett and Mary Moriarty confirmed ICE agents are not protected by absolute immunity, and constitutional law expert Michael J.Z. Mannheimer stated that state prosecutors can pursue charges against federal officials. The statements were met with criticism, with some calling the comments dangerous and expressing concerns about a shift toward a police state.
Read More
Swalwell, Goldman to offer bill stripping ICE agents of qualified immunity. This is a move that’s sparking a lot of discussion, and for good reason. The proposal, known as the ICE OUT Act, aims to remove the legal protection known as “qualified immunity” from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers. Essentially, this means ICE agents could be held personally liable in civil lawsuits if they violate someone’s constitutional rights. The context for this is particularly relevant, especially considering recent events like the shooting of Renee Nicole Macklin Good, which has reignited the debate around ICE’s tactics and accountability.
The core of the issue, and what’s driving the calls for this bill, is a growing sense that qualified immunity shields law enforcement, including ICE, from facing the consequences of their actions.… Continue reading
The Trump administration is taking legal action to prevent California from enforcing a new law that restricts federal law enforcement officers from wearing masks while on duty. This legislation, spurred by concerns over masked immigration agents, was enacted following a series of immigration raids. The law aims to hold officers accountable by removing “qualified immunity” if they conceal their faces, exposing them to potential lawsuits and penalties. While the administration argues that the law endangers officers, the case raises complex legal questions and has created divisions within law enforcement, highlighting a clash between state regulations and federal authority.
Read More
Last week in south Portland, federal immigration enforcement agents reportedly interfered with emergency personnel rescuing an injured protester. According to Willamette Week, agents delayed an ambulance exiting an ICE facility with the injured protester, requesting to ride along despite lacking arrest paperwork. The agents allegedly blocked the ambulance’s exit, behaving aggressively and threatening the driver with arrest and violence, even as the emergency crew attempted to de-escalate the situation. One agent is reported to have threatened to “shoot” the driver.
Read More
Bill from Michigan’s Thanedar would end qualified immunity for ICE agents, and it’s a move that sparks some interesting thoughts. It seems like a pretty straightforward concept: if you’re an agent of the law, and you’re doing something that harms someone, you should be held accountable. No special pass, no “qualified immunity” shielding you from the consequences of your actions. That’s the core of the bill.
It’s important to remember that this isn’t just about ICE agents. The sentiment expressed suggests a broader perspective: that qualified immunity shouldn’t protect *anyone* in a position of authority, be it a cop, a federal agent, or anyone else who wields power.… Continue reading
Following the death of Ryan Smith, his mother Rose Johnson’s excessive force lawsuit against a Seattle police officer has been cleared to move forward by a federal judge. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the officer’s claim of qualified immunity, allowing the case to proceed with a tentative trial date set for September 15. The lawsuit alleges the officer’s “willful and reckless” conduct violated Smith’s constitutional rights, particularly given the officer’s history of involvement in multiple fatal shootings. The ruling challenges the defense of qualified immunity, which often shields officers from civil rights claims.
Read More
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled to allow the Martin family’s lawsuit against the FBI to proceed, reversing lower court decisions that had dismissed the case. The Court rejected the appeals court’s interpretation of the Federal Tort Claims Act and the Supremacy Clause, clarifying that the Act’s exception for law enforcement actions should not be narrowly construed to shield the government from liability. While the Court did limit the scope of the “law enforcement proviso,” it ultimately paved the way for the family to pursue their claim for damages resulting from the FBI’s wrongful raid. This decision stems from a 2017 incident where the FBI mistakenly raided the Martin family home, causing significant distress and damages.
Read More
A federal judge dismissed portions of a lawsuit against Farmington police officers who fatally shot Robert Dotson during a mistaken raid. The judge ruled the officers’ use of deadly force was reasonable given Dotson’s actions of pointing a firearm at them, granting them qualified immunity. While acknowledging the officers’ error in going to the wrong address, the court found the threat posed by Dotson justified their response. The lawsuit will proceed on remaining claims under state tort law and the New Mexico Civil Rights Act.
Read More
Timothy Michael Randall, 29, was fatally shot by Rusk County Sheriff’s Office Sgt. Shane Iversen following a traffic stop for a suspected stop sign violation. Dashcam footage shows Iversen tackling Randall to the ground, then shooting him as he attempted to flee; Iversen claimed he feared for his life due to a suspected weapon, but two use-of-force experts dispute this. A grand jury declined to indict Iversen, but a federal lawsuit filed by Randall’s mother, citing excessive force, is ongoing, with a judge recommending denial of Iversen’s motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood
Swalwell, Goldman Bill Targets ICE Agents’ Qualified Immunity
Swalwell, Goldman to offer bill stripping ICE agents of qualified immunity. This is a move that’s sparking a lot of discussion, and for good reason. The proposal, known as the ICE OUT Act, aims to remove the legal protection known as “qualified immunity” from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers. Essentially, this means ICE agents could be held personally liable in civil lawsuits if they violate someone’s constitutional rights. The context for this is particularly relevant, especially considering recent events like the shooting of Renee Nicole Macklin Good, which has reignited the debate around ICE’s tactics and accountability.
The core of the issue, and what’s driving the calls for this bill, is a growing sense that qualified immunity shields law enforcement, including ICE, from facing the consequences of their actions.… Continue reading