-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
SCOTUS OT 2022 - Qualified Immunity Edition
- Thread starter Knuckle Dragger
- Start date
cockpitbob
NES Member
In what feels like an act of complete futility, my fingers are crossed for this one.
I know you’re joking, but I can absolutely imagine that sort of defense.
The really f***ed up part is how out of one side of their mouths they’ll say they have a duty to protect, and at the same time point to the SCOTUS case saying they have no duty to protect.
Well the 2021 SCOTUS term kicked off today and with it another denial of cert in a qualified immunity case. This time with a dissent from Justice Sotomayor: https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/100421zor_5357.pdf (skip to the last two pages).
'
Supreme Court Ignores Constitutional Violations by Federal Police, Green Lights Absolute Immunity Even in Cases Dealing with Attempted Murder and Well-Documented Lies by Officers - Institute for Justice
ARLINGTON, Va.—A little more than one week after the U.S. Supreme Court announced in Egbert v. Boule that federal police engaged in immigration-related work cannot […]
ij.org
GaryO
NES Member
Are you surprised?Supreme Court Ignores Constitutional Violations by Federal Police, Green Lights Absolute Immunity Even in Cases Dealing with Attempted Murder and Well-Documented Lies by Officers - Institute for Justice
ARLINGTON, Va.—A little more than one week after the U.S. Supreme Court announced in Egbert v. Boule that federal police engaged in immigration-related work cannot […]
Time to revive this thread as the SCOTUS OT2022 QI Edition.
IJ has petitioned the court in Novak v. City of Parma, OH. Mr. Novak's issue has appeared elsewhere on NES, but let's bring it back here now.
Long story short: Guy creates a parody Facebook page for his local PD. They arrest him, charge and try him user what is essentially a computer hacking statutes. He's found not guilty at trial and sues to vindicate his civil rights. Oh, but CA6 determines that the officers are entitled to qualified immunity because it is not 'clearly established' that parody is protected speech.
Cert stage amici include The Onion and The Babylon Bee. If you do nothing else, at least read these briefs. Parma's response is due November 28th. I'm hoping this hits conference in December.
IJ has petitioned the court in Novak v. City of Parma, OH. Mr. Novak's issue has appeared elsewhere on NES, but let's bring it back here now.
Long story short: Guy creates a parody Facebook page for his local PD. They arrest him, charge and try him user what is essentially a computer hacking statutes. He's found not guilty at trial and sues to vindicate his civil rights. Oh, but CA6 determines that the officers are entitled to qualified immunity because it is not 'clearly established' that parody is protected speech.
Cert stage amici include The Onion and The Babylon Bee. If you do nothing else, at least read these briefs. Parma's response is due November 28th. I'm hoping this hits conference in December.
Last edited:
amm5061
NES Member
Oh I can't wait to see the logic behind that one.
I give the cop’s lawyer and ‘A’ for effort but a ‘D’ for persuasion.
KBCraig
NES Member
Babylon Bee's actual amicus filing:
Babylon Bee's satyrical amicus non-filing:
Honestly, I don't know which is better. LOL
Babylon Bee's satyrical amicus non-filing:
Honestly, I don't know which is better. LOL
I’m not sure the ‘but he has a gun, maybe licensed. Maybe not, and a running car in a high crime area so he has the right to cuff the guy and search the entire car’ is going to fly lol. The desperate plea of ‘we’ll no one really knew the limits of a search because this could have never ruled on that aspect’ isn’t persuasive either.
I’d be shocked if it isn’t upheld 3-0. SCOTUS won’t touch it either so the cop is screwed and rightly so.
The panel is 2 biden judges, one Obama.
I would argue parody is established as clearly protected by way of lawsuits that established that use of copyrighted material for parody purposes is legal
"A parody is fair use of a copyrighted work when it is a humorous form of social commentary and literary criticism in which one work imitates another."
"A parody is fair use of a copyrighted work when it is a humorous form of social commentary and literary criticism in which one work imitates another."
Similar threads
