Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

damnedifIknow

(3,183 posts)
Wed Nov 11, 2015, 10:14 AM Nov 2015

Once Again, Justice Sotomayor Proves Herself an Ally Against Police Brutality

On March 23, 2010, trooper Chadrin Mullinex of the Texas Department of Public Safety fired six shots at Israel Leija Jr’s car. Leija was allegedly armed and intoxicated, and he was the subject of a high-speed police chase. Instead of seeing if the spike strips he had put out stopped the runaway, Mullinex chose to fire his gun at Leija’s car – even ignoring the orders of his supervisor not to shoot.

*The majority opinion rationalized the officer’s use of deadly force, saying that during car chases, the standards for application of this law is “hazy.” Only Justice Sotomayor dissented against the ruling, which granted Mullinex qualified immunity.

Sotomayor has repeatedly proven herself as an outspoken critic of police violence, and this decision was no exception. Once again, she was in the position of reminding her fellow justices and the American public that police operate under constitutional limits, intended to protect individual citizens from police brutality and the use of deadly force.

“Mullenix ignored the longstanding and well-settled Fourth Amendment rule that there must be a governmental interest not just in seizing a suspect, but in the level of force used to effectuate that seizure,” Sotomayor wrote. She continued:

When Mullenix confronted his superior officer after the shooting, his first words were, “How’s that for proactive?” (Mullenix was apparently referencing an earlier counseling session in which Byrd suggested that he was not enterprising enough.) The glib comment does not impact our legal analysis; an officer’s actual intentions are irrelevant to the Fourth Amendment’s “objectively reasonable” inquiry. But the comment seems to me revealing of the culture this Court’s decision supports when it calls it reasonable—or even reasonably reasonable—to use deadly force for no discernible gain and over a supervisor’s express order to “stand by.” By sanctioning a “shoot first, think later” approach to policing, the Court renders the protections of the Fourth Amendment hollow."

http://www.jdjournal.com/2015/11/11/once-again-justice-sotomayor-proves-herself-an-ally-against-police-brutality/

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Once Again, Justice Sotomayor Proves Herself an Ally Against Police Brutality (Original Post) damnedifIknow Nov 2015 OP
Shame the other 8 justices are not Kelvin Mace Nov 2015 #1
Seems that way damnedifIknow Nov 2015 #2

damnedifIknow

(3,183 posts)
2. Seems that way
Wed Nov 11, 2015, 10:24 AM
Nov 2015

" a “shoot first, think later” approach to policing, the Court renders the protections of the Fourth Amendment hollow."


Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Once Again, Justice Sotom...