Whether the police officers' decision to transport a detainee who they suspected had ingested drugs to a nearby prison where he was evaluated by the prison's medical staff rather than to a hospital is an obvious constitutional violation depriving the officers of qualified immunity despite the lack of controlling precedent proscribing their conduct?

QUESTION PRESENTED The Petitioners are police officers who arrested Terelle Thomas after a traffic stop. Mr. Thomas was observed to have a pasty white substance in his mouth which he spit out and a powdery substance on his lips face and shirt. He repeatedly denied having ingested cocaine, coherently responded to questions, assured the officers that he felt “okay” and showed no signs of medical distress or drug toxicity. Mr. Thomas was transported to the nearby County Prison where he was assessed by the prison medical staff and cleared to remain. About one hour later he collapsed in a holding cell and eventually died of cocaine and fentanyl toxicity. The Court of Appeals acknowledged the lack of controlling precedential authority proscribing Petitioners’ conduct in the context of these facts yet denied them qualified immunity holding that their actions were an obvious violation of the Fourteenth Amendment right of a person in the custody of law enforcement to receive medical care. The question presented is: Whether the police officers’ decision to transport a detainee who they suspected had ingested drugs to a nearby prison where he was evaluated by the prison’s medical staff rather than to a hospital is an obvious constitutional violation depriving the officers of qualified immunity despite the lack of controlling precedent proscribing their conduct ?