Whether an officer can use force to assist another officer under the Fourth Amendment when making a split-second decision with incomplete information, and whether the Ninth Circuit's decision conflicts with Supreme Court precedent

This petition poses important, but unresolved, questions of federal law regarding whether the Fourth Amendment permits an officer to use force based on the belief that a fellow officer engaged in a physical struggle has acted lawfully. Petitioner Deputy Christopher Thomas observed his partner engaged in a physical struggle with Respondent Tracy Pachote. Thomas had an obscured view of Pachote and mere seconds to decide what to do in a rapidly evolving situation. Lacking information about whether Pachote posed a threat to Nelson, Thomas decided to assist Nelson in subduing Pachote. Although officers assist each other in this fashion innumerable times every day and this issue has incredible practical import, this Court has not issued a decision on point. Nor had the Ninth Circuit prior to this case. Despite the absence of controlling authority, the Ninth Circuit in a split decision denied Thomas qualified immunity. The majority opinion erroneously resolves this question of first impression and in a way that conflicts with this Court’s decisions in Graham v. Connor , 490 U.S. 386 (1989), White v. Pauly , 580 U.S. 73 (2017), and Kisela v. Hughes , 584 U.S. 100 (2018). Because the majority opinion is “far off the mark” and “dangerous to law enforcement,”