Title: A 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.
Policy area: Crime and Law Enforcement

Summary:
This resolution recognizes that there are legal and racial inequities in the doctrine of qualified immunity as it is applied to law enforcement. The resolution also acknowledges that Congress should amend the Revised Statutes to eliminate the qualified immunity defense for law enforcement officers.

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 602 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>






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 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

    (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 endangers 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
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) recognizes and acknowledges the legal and racial 
        inequities inherent in the judicial doctrine of qualified 
        immunity as that doctrine is applied to law enforcement 
        officers;
            (2) recognizes and acknowledges that the doctrine of 
        qualified immunity rests on a mistaken judicial interpretation 
        of a statute enacted by Congress; and
            (3) recognizes and acknowledges that, to correct that 
        mistaken judicial interpretation, Congress should amend section 
        1979 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1983) to eliminate the 
        qualified immunity defense for law enforcement officers as that 
        defense exists as of June 1, 2020.
                                 <all>