Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2390988
 


 



Qualified Immunity and Statutory Interpretation


Ilan Wurman


U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit; Stanford Law School

February 4, 2014

Seattle University Law Review, Forthcoming

Abstract:     
Before the 1989 case of Graham v. Connor, excessive force cases were pursued under either state law or the insuperable “shocks the conscience” test of the Fourteenth Amendment. Only after Graham did excessive force cases — now under the Fourth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 — inundate the federal courts, which had by then granted far-reaching immunities to officers for their constitutional torts. As a result of federal qualified immunity doctrine, which many states have adopted for themselves, excessive force cases rarely get to trial, plaintiffs often cannot recover, and courts struggle to find principled distinctions from one qualified immunity case to the next.

Part II of this Article describes the evolution of this qualified immunity doctrine and demonstrates how common law immunities were traditionally held to have been incorporated into § 1983 by the Congress of 1871 as a matter of statutory interpretation. It claims that only when the Court began hearing federal Bivens actions and created an immunity doctrine untethered from statutory interpretation, the common-law approach was lost and the modern, nearly insurmountable qualified immunity doctrine was adopted.

Part II thus establishes the historical importance of common-law interpretation to § 1983 suits. Part III then shows how differently excessive force cases would have to be treated were the court to return to the common law interpretive methods in § 1983 cases. At common law, excessive force actions were quite common and more liberal toward plaintiffs seeking redress; officers were expected to pay damages for any unnecessary force; and it was the province of the jury to determine such questions. Parts IV-V then make the theoretical case under both constitutional and statutory interpretation for replacing modern qualified immunity doctrine with a return to its common law variety in excessive-force actions, an approach that would also be far more judicially workable than the current doctrine.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 51

Keywords: qualified immunity, excessive force, statutory interpretation, common law, 1983, civil rights statute

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 7, 2014 ; Last revised: August 1, 2014

Suggested Citation

Wurman, Ilan, Qualified Immunity and Statutory Interpretation (February 4, 2014). Seattle University Law Review, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2390988

Contact Information

Ilan Wurman (Contact Author)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ( email )
United States
Stanford Law School ( email )
559 Nathan Abbott Way
Stanford, CA 94305
United States

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 172
Downloads: 19

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.469 seconds