Supreme Court grants Vermont officer qualified immunity in protester arrest case; Sotomayor dissents
The Facts
- The Supreme Court ruled that Vermont State Police Sgt. Jacob Zorn is entitled to qualified immunity in a lawsuit filed by protester Shela Linton.
- The case arose from a 2015 protest sit-in at the Vermont Statehouse during the governor’s inauguration day.
- Court records described Zorn using a wristlock or similar restraint to remove Linton after she refused to leave or stand up.
- The Supreme Court reversed the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the case.
- The court’s three liberal justices dissented from the decision.
- Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissent joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
- Several reports said Sotomayor argued the ruling would give officers broad latitude to inflict unnecessary or gratuitous pain on nonviolent protesters.
Context
What is qualified immunity?
Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that shields government officials, including police officers, from personal liability unless they violated a clearly established constitutional right theepochtimes.com,Daily Signal,AllToc.
What did the lower court decide before the Supreme Court stepped in?
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that Zorn was not entitled to qualified immunity, and the Supreme Court reversed that decision Fox News,TheBlaze,news.bloomberglaw.c….
Why did Sotomayor object to the ruling?
According to multiple reports, Sotomayor said the majority’s approach would protect officers even in cases involving nonviolent protesters and warned that it could allow gratuitous or unnecessary force Newsweek,Court House News Se…,DNyuz.
The receipts — all 19 sources
Wire services (1)
Independent coverage (18)
Facts first. Then every angle.
The day’s biggest stories in one short brief — the facts everyone agrees on, then the competing values behind the headlines. Free in your inbox.