May a court decline to address qualified-immunity argument based on factual disputes?

QUESTION PRESENTED In this excessive force case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the defendant officials (petitioners here) moved for summary judgment arguing that, on the facts taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, they did not violate plaintiff’s clearly established constitutional rights. The question presented is: May a court decline to address such an argument based solely on its determination that genuine disputes of fact exist?