A doctrine that denies justice

End Qualified Immunity

Government officials can violate your constitutional rights and face zero accountability. This judge-made doctrine shields abuse and denies victims their day in court.

Take Action → Learn More
57%
Cases Dismissed
1967
Year Created
0
Constitutional Basis
4
States Reformed
The Problem

What Is Qualified Immunity?

Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that shields government officials—including police officers—from civil lawsuits unless they violated "clearly established" law.

In practice, this means officials can escape accountability even when they clearly violated someone's constitutional rights, simply because no previous case had the exact same facts.

Courts have dismissed cases involving stolen property, excessive force, and even deaths—because the specific type of misconduct hadn't been ruled unconstitutional before in that jurisdiction.

"The doctrine of qualified immunity is not grounded in the Constitution or any statute."
— Justice Clarence Thomas, Ziglar v. Abbasi (2017)
How We Got Here

Timeline

1871
Congress passes Section 1983, allowing citizens to sue government officials who violate their rights. No immunity mentioned.
1967
Supreme Court creates qualified immunity in Pierson v. Ray, claiming officials acting in "good faith" deserve protection.
1982
Harlow v. Fitzgerald removes the "good faith" requirement—now officials only need to show no "clearly established" law was violated.
2009
Pearson v. Callahan allows courts to grant immunity without ever deciding if rights were violated—freezing constitutional law.
Today
Courts routinely dismiss cases with egregious rights violations because no prior case matches the exact circumstances.
Real Consequences

Justice Denied

These aren't edge cases. They represent a pattern of courts prioritizing technicalities over accountability.

Fresno, California
Jessop v. City of Fresno
Police officers executing a search warrant allegedly stole $225,000 in cash and rare coins. The Ninth Circuit granted qualified immunity because "there was no clearly established law" saying theft during a warrant violated the Fourth Amendment.
Immunity Granted — No Accountability
Coffee County, Georgia
Corbitt v. Vickers
An officer attempting to shoot a family dog instead shot a 10-year-old child lying on the ground. The Eleventh Circuit granted immunity because the specific danger to the child wasn't "obvious" under prior case law.
Immunity Granted — No Accountability
Caldwell, Idaho
Shaniz West Case
A woman called 911 for help during a mental health crisis. Officers arrived and shot her within seconds. Courts granted immunity because the exact circumstances weren't previously established as unconstitutional.
Immunity Granted — No Accountability
Texas
Zadeh v. Robinson
DEA agents raided a doctor's office without a warrant. Even though warrantless searches are presumptively unconstitutional, the court granted immunity because prior cases hadn't addressed this specific type of medical practice.
Immunity Granted — No Accountability
What You Can Do

Join The Fight

Qualified immunity wasn't created by Congress—it was invented by courts. That means Congress can end it. And state legislatures can reform it within their borders. Your voice matters.

Contact Congress → Ohio Coalition

Ending Qualified Immunity Act

Federal legislation to eliminate qualified immunity for law enforcement officers.

View Bill →

Institute for Justice

Leading legal advocacy group challenging qualified immunity in courts nationwide.

Learn More →

State-Level Reform

Colorado, New Mexico, and NYC have reformed QI. Your state could be next.

Find Your State →

Share This Site

Spread awareness. Most people don't know qualified immunity exists.

Share on X →