SoylentNews

"exaeta" writes:

http://blogs.findlaw.com/supreme_court/2018/01/does-scotus-hate-individual-civil-rights.html#more [findlaw.com]

As Justice Adelman explains:

Ultimately, the doctrine of qualified immunity seems to rest on nothing more than a feeling by Supreme Court justices that government officials should not be held responsible for violating an individual's constitutional rights except in extremely limited circumstances.

Does the doctrine of qualified immunity go too far? Does qualified immunity really have any basis in our constitution, or even sovereign immunity for that matter? Should we amend the constitution to get rid of both of them?

Original Submission