top of page

💫 Good qualified immunity decision alert 💫

In Calonge v. City of San Jose, the 9th Circuit ruled it's clearly established that when a man's walking down the street with a gun in his waistband, posing no threat, police can't shout conflicting commands and then shoot.

Beyond the holding itself, the 9th Cir. makes a couple important analytical moves to get to its decision. First, it explains that the plaintiff doesn't have to cite the cases that clearly establish the law in her brief - if the cases exist, the law is clearly established.

Next, the 9th Cir. finds that the plaintiff's facts show a constitutional violation, relying on 9th cir precedent, and then make clear that that precedent is enough to clearly establish the law.

Third. The 9th Circuit makes clear, in rejecting defendant's argument, that the key question is whether the law is clearly established VIEWING THE FACTS IN THE LIGHT MOST FAVORABLE TO THE PLAINTIFF. That's the standard, but courts all too often seem to forget it.

Thank you, Ninth Circuit, for a sensible application of a nonsensical doctrine.

bottom of page