Qualified Immunity

AFTER QUALIFIED IMMUNITY

Joanna C. Schwartz*

Courts, scholars, and advocacy organizations across the political spectrum are calling on the Supreme Court to limit qualified immunity or do away with the defense altogether. They argue—and offer compelling evidence to show—the doctrine bears little resemblance to defenses available when Section 1983 became law, undermines government account­ability, and is both unnecessary and ill-suited to shield government defendants from the burdens and...

The Supreme Court’s qualified immunity jurisprudence provides little guidance on a central component of the doctrine: the proper sources of “clearly established law.” As a result, lower courts often resort to a restrictive definition of clearly established law, requiring a control­ling precedent in the jurisdiction where the violation took place. This formalist approach unmoors qualified immunity from its intended pur­pose: ensuring that...