Immunity for Government Thugs - The Latest Outrage

If Liberty is really going to reign supreme here, we must dispense with the expansion of immunity for government sorts. The Framers, having the subject matter in discussion, felt that the only governmental immunity that should exist was for federal legislators in narrow circumstances. Article I, sec 6, the Constitution.  That axiomatically means they intended there to be no other immunity from responsibility for wrongful conduct by government.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court first decreed immunity for itself and for other judges, then for their prosecutorial pals, then qualifiedly for cops, then totally for the employers of bad cops [absent unprovable issues], and then for many other government workers and agents.  While the general polity is held responsible in damages for its harmful actions, the government [servants of that polity] can mistreat people with impunity.  And that is partially why we have convictions of innocent people, violent mistreatment of people by cops, searches based on warrants judges should never have issued, searches without warrants that should never occur, outlandish bail settings not justified by any established flight risk, increasing judicial arrogance, etc.

We must reverse the regime of immunity that is freeing up government to be bad, harmful, injurious, mean.

The founding of this Republic had as one of its overarching principles that freedom requires that all to be held responsible for their actions – there were to be no favored groups who could oppress others by right or with impunity, and we must return to that founding doctrine, lest our loudly boasted devotion to Liberty be further sacrificed on the altar of favoritism and privilege and prestige.

The latest outrage by the Supreme Court protecting its constabularial pals is Carroll v. Carman, in which the cops went to a guy’s back door because they saw that people invited to the house had gone there, beat the guy, and when sued they then urged they thought it was okay because they didn’t know any better.  The Supreme Court, showing it is supreme only in the extremeness of its protection of its pals, said the cops were qualifiedly immune, because they could not have known their actions were illegal. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-212_c07d.pdf

Huh?  There didn’t even need to be an analysis in the case of whether their actions actually violated the Fourth Amendment [they did, because the fact that you specifically invite people to do something does not mean uninvited cops can do the same thing!], because they were allowed to invoke qualified immunity, which is elevating to a constitutional art form the notion that ignorance of the law is an excuse – for cops, not for you or me.

This is rampant and growing police statism, expressly invited and further enabled by the Supreme Court, and it has to stop, or our pretensions of Liberty must cease.