Supremes make it harder to charge cops for shooting people without reason

[brucejoel99]

In my opinion, the majority's reasoning is perplexing: Hughes was nowhere near the officers, had committed no illegal act, was suspected of no crime, & didn't raise the knife in the direction of Chadwick or anyone else. What's more, Kisela alone resorted to deadly force in this case; confronted w/ the same circumstances as Kisela, neither of his fellow officers took the same drastic measure that he did. B/c Kisela plainly lacked any legitimate interest justifying the use of deadly force against a woman who posed no objective threat of harm to officers or others, had committed no crime, & appeared calm & collected during the police encounter, he shouldn't have been entitled to qualified immunity. Of course, this decision is just another part of a disturbing trend of unflinching willingness to protect police officers accused of using excessive force. The court's decision here concerning qualified immunity simply transforms the doctrine into an absolute shield for law enforcement officers. And there's nothing right or just under the law about that.