III 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 602 

Recognizing that the murder of George Floyd by officers of the Minneapolis 

Police Department is the result of pervasive and systemic racism that 

cannot be dismantled without, among other things, proper redress in 

the courts. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 2, 2020 

Mr. BOOKER (for Mr. MARKEY (for himself, Mr. BOOKER, Ms. WARREN, Mr. 

VAN HOLLEN, and Mr. SANDERS)) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing that the murder of George Floyd by officers 

of the Minneapolis Police Department is the result of 

pervasive and systemic racism that cannot be dismantled 

without, among other things, proper redress in the 

courts. 

Whereas Black people in the United States are disproportionately the victims of shootings, chokeholds, and other uses 

of excessive force by law enforcement officers; 

Whereas the use of excessive force during an arrest or investigatory stop constitutes an unreasonable seizure under 

the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United 

States, which guarantees the right of every person in the 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 602 IS 

United States to be free from unreasonable searches and 

seizures at the hands of law enforcement officers; 

Whereas the use of excessive force during a period of pretrial 

detention constitutes the deprivation of due process under 

the Fifth and 14th Amendments to the Constitution of 

the United States, which guarantee the right of every 

person in the United States to be free from arbitrary interference with the liberty of that person at the hands of 

law enforcement officers; 

Whereas the use of excessive force during a term of imprisonment constitutes the use of cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution 

of the United States, which guarantees the right of every 

person in the United States to be free from cruel and unusual punishment at the hands of law enforcement officers; 

Whereas section 1979 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 

1983), which is derived from the first section of the Act 

of April 20, 1871 (commonly known as and referred to 

in this preamble as the ‘‘Civil Rights Act of 1871’’) (17 

Stat. 13, chapter 22), makes liable ‘‘every person’’, including police officers, correctional officers, and other law 

enforcement officers, who, under color of law, deprives 

another person of civil rights; 

Whereas the judicial doctrine of qualified immunity wrongly 

and unjustly precludes the victims of police violence from 

vindicating the rights of those victims under section 1979 

of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1983)— 

(1) by effectively immunizing law enforcement officers from civil suit unless a prior court case has ‘‘clearly 

established’’ that the challenged use of excessive force is 

illegal; and 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 602 IS 

(2) by narrowly construing the ‘‘clearly established’’ 

standard so that any factual or contextual distinctions 

between the challenged use of excessive force and the use 

of excessive force in a prior case, even small or insignificant distinctions, are cause for qualified immunity with 

respect to the challenged use of excessive force; 

Whereas the defense of qualified immunity has no historical 

common law basis; 

Whereas the intent of Congress in enacting the Civil Rights 

Act of 1871 was to hold State and local law enforcement 

officers accountable for intimidating, harming, and murdering Black people in the United States after the Civil 

War; 

Whereas, in 2017, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas 

recognized that the defense of qualified immunity has no 

textual basis in section 1979 of the Revised Statutes (42 

U.S.C. 1983) and thereby represents ‘‘precisely the sort 

of freewheeling policy choice’’ that courts ‘‘have previously disclaimed the power to make’’; 

Whereas the courts of appeals of the United States are more 

likely than not to grant qualified immunity to law enforcement officers; 

Whereas, in 2018, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor 

acknowledged that the Supreme Court of the United 

States ‘‘routinely displays an unflinching willingness’’ to 

reverse decisions of the courts of appeals of the United 

States denying qualified immunity to law enforcement officers; 

Whereas the lack of accountability that results from qualified 

immunity arouses frustration, disappointment, and anger 

throughout the United States, which discredits and enVerDate Sep 11 2014 21:20 Jun 02, 2020 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\SR602.IS SR602

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
4 

•SRES 602 IS 

dangers the vast majority of law enforcement officers, 

who do not engage in the use excessive force; 

Whereas a civil action under section 1979 of the Revised 

Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1983) is often the only viable solution for victims of police violence and the families of 

those victims to hold law enforcement officers accountable for the use of excessive force because criminal prosecutors are reluctant to charge, and juries are hesitant 

to convict, law enforcement officers; and 

Whereas the Government of the United States has established itself as a government of laws, and not of men, but 

will cease to be so if it does not furnish a viable remedy 

for all civil rights violations: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) recognizes and acknowledges the legal and 

3 racial inequities inherent in the judicial doctrine of 

4 qualified immunity as that doctrine is applied to law 

5 enforcement officers; 

6 (2) recognizes and acknowledges that the doc7 trine of qualified immunity rests on a mistaken judi8 cial interpretation of a statute enacted by Congress; 

9 and 

10 (3) recognizes and acknowledges that, to correct 

11 that mistaken judicial interpretation, Congress 

12 should amend section 1979 of the Revised Statutes 

13 (42 U.S.C. 1983) to eliminate the qualified immuVerDate Sep 11 2014 21:20 Jun 02, 2020 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\SR602.IS SR602

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
5 

•SRES 602 IS 

1 nity defense for law enforcement officers as that de2 fense exists as of June 1, 2020. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS