Whether an officer's subjective belief of danger can negate objective video evidence showing no threat when determining qualified immunity on summary judgment

QUESTION PRESENTED Petitioners, the plaintiffs in the underlying case, brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Officers Hess and Kimpel after the officers shot and killed Genevive Dawes during an incident where officers were responding to a report of a suspicious vehicle in an apartment complex parking lot. The summary judgment record includes numerous videos from officer body cameras showing that no one was in danger at the time Officers Hess and Kimpel decided to shoot. However, the district court and the Fifth Circuit considered the officers’ subjective statements that they believed other officers were in danger from Dawes’s vehicle, even though such belief was belied by the actual, objective video evidence. In considering that belief, the Fifth Circuit determined that the clearly established law did not prohibit the use of deadly force even when an officer knows that there is no danger. The Question Presented Is: In a qualified immunity determination on summary judgment, did the officer's testimony that he subjectively believed there was a danger justifying the use of deadly force negate the fact issue raised by the objective video evidence showing that there was no danger?