At the Cato Institute's meeting on March 1, 2018 in Washington, DC, the topic "Qualified Immunity: The Supreme Court's Unlawful Assault on Civil Right" was discussed by legal analysts Adelman, Baude, Glasberg and Pincus. The moderator, himself a Cato Institute member, mentioned 2 major problems the high court in the United States seems to be currently bogged down over: 1) the extensive use of plea bargaining in the criminal court system that circumvents the jury system of meeting out justice; and 2) the complete lack of accountability in law enforcement, whose constituents are held to a much low state of accountability for their actions, (my added editorial note: many recorded on visual tape for the public-at-large to review). The notion of qualified immunity, for one, has appeared in juridical decisions. Using it, the Supreme Court has essentially lowered the standard of immunity for the police (though it does not so far apply to those outside the field of law enforcement."
The 14th Amendment, Section 93 guarantees the constitutional right to a victim to sue those liable under tort law for harm against him. But the district Judge Adelman, surveying some appropriate cases against officers in his sample--found relatively few police were forced to pay claims against them. Seemingly if true of the vast number of such claims made, minority populations across the country have little or no legal remedy for acts the public may deem as instances of police brutality in a significant number of community neighborhoods, e.g., those labelled as black ghettos.
The moderator concluded with the message "We of the Cato Institute will take up this cudgel. Starting next week, we are to meet with Congressmen to rectify this diversion" (my added editorial note: into what can only be thought of as myth-devising by the Supreme Court of the land, there being no body of its opinions recognizing this concept prior to the 1980s.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment