Perhaps I can clear up a bit of confusion here (please correct me if I’m wrong, 98).
A federal officer (or any officer) can be investigated and disciplined for misbehavior. And he can be arrested if that misbehavior is criminal.
But according to the article, that officer cannot be personally sued, even if his actions had nothing at all to do with his job.
What this court is saying has NOTHING to do with Qualified Immunity. This is taking immunity into a level probably never thought possible. And, as much as I loathe institutions like the ACLU, I’m hoping they’re swooping in.
Qualified Immunity offers protection against civil suits. Nothing more. It prevents people from going after an LEO, after an incident. If it’s determined that the LEO acted properly, within their departments training, within the law....they didn’t do anything wrong, then they’re are protected from being sued in civil court.
If they didn’t act properly, violated department training, acted in violation of the law, then they can be sued and in many, if not most, cases will probably be charged criminally.
What this court is saying, if I’m reading it right, is that Feds have immunity for EVERYTHING they do, on duty or off duty.
And therein lies the rub.
So, this court, like many others, just invented a law out of thin air to protect a federal agent. And if you think about it, by deciding ‘absolute immunity’ the court just gave a whole lot of wiggle room for what ‘absolute immunity’ is.
And, after reading the article, it’s insane that the court can come up with this decision. I could be wrong but it appears that the fed was off-duty, meaning that NONE of his ‘protections’ would even apply.
Amazing how they take care of one another. Curious to know who the original judges were in the case.
Interesting comment from a 5th Circuit Judge......
Federal Judge Don Willett, a Trump appointee to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, was outraged by his own court’s ruling.
“If you wear a federal badge, you can inflict excessive force on someone with little fear of liability,” Willett lamented in a March opinion as the appellate court, bound by prior rulings, blocked a lawsuit against a federal agent outside Houston who engaged in an appalling abuse of power.
“Middle-management circuit judges must salute smartly and follow precedent,” Willett added, even when that means “private citizens who are brutalized — even killed — by rogue federal officials” can find no relief in the courts.
Doesn’t it seem like qualified immunity should apply when you are on the job? Off job is different. Maybe it is just the way the law was written and the judge had to go by what was on the books.