| ... |
... |
@@ -1,63
+1,0 @@ |
| 1 |
|
-==Definitions== |
| 2 |
|
- |
| 3 |
|
- |
| 4 |
|
- |
| 5 |
|
- |
| 6 |
|
-Value: Government Legitimacy, as achieved when the government protects the rights of citizens. |
| 7 |
|
-Criterion: Increasing Accountability |
| 8 |
|
- |
| 9 |
|
- |
| 10 |
|
- |
| 11 |
|
- |
| 12 |
|
-==Contention One: Qualified Immunity is excused ignorance for public officials. == |
| 13 |
|
- |
| 14 |
|
- |
| 15 |
|
- |
| 16 |
|
- |
| 17 |
|
-Armacost 98 { Barbara, Professor of Law at University of Virginia Qualified Immunity: Ignorance Excused, http://www.law.virginia.edu/pdf/faculty/hein/armacost/51vand_l_rev583_1998.pdf, pg 2} |
| 18 |
|
-In this Article, Professor Armacost uses fair notice in criminal law as a paradigm for analyzing the role of not |
| 19 |
|
-...AND... |
| 20 |
|
- attach. In such cases, qualified immunity's notice inquiry-whether the law was clear-acts as a proxy for fault. |
| 21 |
|
- |
| 22 |
|
- |
| 23 |
|
- |
| 24 |
|
- |
| 25 |
|
-==Contention Two: Qualified Immunity has been an ignorant excuse in many instances, and we can see this in the case of Leija and Sheenah. == |
| 26 |
|
- |
| 27 |
|
- |
| 28 |
|
- |
| 29 |
|
- |
| 30 |
|
-A) QI was claimed wrongly in the case of Mullenix V Leijha. |
| 31 |
|
- Liptak 15 { Adam, covers the United States Supreme Court and writes "Sidebar," a column on legal developments. |
| 32 |
|
-...AND... |
| 33 |
|
-/www.nytimes.com/2015/11/10/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-police-officer-who-shot-man-in-car-chase.html } |
| 34 |
|
- |
| 35 |
|
- |
| 36 |
|
- |
| 37 |
|
- |
| 38 |
|
-====B ) The supreme court ruled in favor of the policemen who shoot Teresea Sheehan, a woman with (dis)abilities. ==== |
| 39 |
|
-Liptak 15 { ,Adam, covers the United States Supreme Court and writes "Sidebar," a column on legal developments. A graduate of Yale Law School, he practiced law "Supreme Court Sides With Police in a Shooting, and Against a State on Taxes," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/us/supreme-courts-rules-on-a-police-shooting-state-taxes-and-prisoners-lawsuits.html?_r=1®ister=facebook } |
| 40 |
|
-The court sided with two San Francisco police officers who in 2008 shot Teresa Sheehan, a mentally ill woman, wh |
| 41 |
|
-...AND... |
| 42 |
|
-San Francisco’s shift in its legal position as the case proceeded had made it impossible to address the question. |
| 43 |
|
- |
| 44 |
|
- |
| 45 |
|
- |
| 46 |
|
- |
| 47 |
|
-==Contention 3: Reduction of Qualified Immunity will allow for further elaboration of constitutional rights and clearly establish more laws. == |
| 48 |
|
- |
| 49 |
|
- |
| 50 |
|
- |
| 51 |
|
- |
| 52 |
|
-====Overall the defense of qualified immunity freezes constitutional elaboration==== |
| 53 |
|
-Matz et al 2011 {Joshua Matz graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School in 2012. He was a law clerk to Judge J. Paul Oetken of the Southern District of New York., “Avoiding Permanent Limbo: Qualified Immunity and the Elaboration of Constitutional Rights from |
| 54 |
|
-Saucier to Camreta (and Beyond)” Pg 672-673} |
| 55 |
|
- |
| 56 |
|
- |
| 57 |
|
- |
| 58 |
|
- |
| 59 |
|
-====AND By reducing qualified immunity, we see an increase of constitutional elaboration. ==== |
| 60 |
|
-Beermann 2009 {Jack Michael , Professor of law at boston university,QUALIFIED IMMUNITY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AVOIDANCE, Pg 34} |
| 61 |
|
-The Supreme Court’s elimination of the subjective element of the qualified immunity defense in constitutional to |
| 62 |
|
-...AND... |
| 63 |
|
-no longer required to reach the constitutional merits whenever the defendant raises a qualified immunity defense. |