Should the Court eliminate or significantly revise the judicially created doctrine of qualified immunity to protect the people's core constitutional rights and assure accountability of the people's public officials?

QUESTION PRESENTED Norman Cooper, a 33-year-old black father, was killed in his parents’ home by officers Flaig and Sanchez after they tased him nine times in a threeminute period. Norman was experiencing an acute mental health episode and under the influence of drugs but was unarmed, respectful, and never attempted to make physical contact with anyone. Norman’s wife and family filed this suit for violations of his constitutional rights resulting in his death. The district court denied the officers’ qualified immunity as to the excessive force claims and set the case for trial. The officers then filed an interlocutory appeal with the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit reversed and rendered determining that the petitioners could not show that the law was so clear that no reasonable officer would have used the same extreme force. Qualified immunity often leads to confounding decisions that defy our most basic notions of justice. There is no accountability. The people’s fundamental rights are eroded. Like Norman Cooper, too many lives have been unnecessarily lost. The question presented is: Should the Court eliminate or significantly revise the judicially created doctrine of qualified immunity to protect the people’s core constitutional rights and assure accountability of the people’s public officials?