JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (Dec. 11, 2024) – A bill filed in the Missouri House would allow lawsuits against law enforcement officers in state court for rights violations, eliminating “qualified immunity” as a defense.
Rep. LaKeySha Bosley filed House Bill 258 (HB258). Under the proposed law, any law enforcement officer who “under color of law, deprives any individual of his or her constitutional rights” would be liable for legal or equitable relief in the state courts.
HB258 explicitly excludes “qualified immunity” as a defense in such cases.
ANOTHER PATH
Typically, people sue police for using excessive force or other types of misconduct in the federal court system under the U.S. Bill of Rights. But federal courts created a qualified immunity defense out of thin air, making it nearly impossible to hold law enforcement officers responsible for actions taken in the line of duty.
The Supreme Court and Congress show no interest in rolling back the qualified immunity doctrine. The best path forward is to bypass the federal system.
In effect, the passage of HB258 would do so by creating an alternative path to address violations of rights in state court with no qualified immunity hurdle to clear.
Similar laws have been passed in Colorado and New Mexico, and California closed some of the qualified immunity loopholes in its state law.
THE PROCESS
It remains unclear how the process created by HB258 would play out.
The first question is whether people will utilize the state courts instead of the federal court system. Under the original constitutional system, such questions would have never been a federal issue to begin with. Regulation of police powers was reserved to the states, not the federal government.
But with the advent of the incorporation doctrine, people reflexively run to federal courts. Removing the federally created qualified immunity hurdle incentivizes people to take advantage of the state system.
The second question is if police officers will be able to transfer cases to federal jurisdiction to take advantage of qualified immunity.
Language in HB258 opens that door. The proposed law would allow people to sue in state court for violations of the “the constitution.” This presumably refers to the U.S. Constitution. All matters regarding the U.S. Constitution or federal law will be remanded to federal courts. To avoid this, plaintiffs would have to sue based solely on the Missouri constitution and its bill of rights. The only way to avoid federal jurisdiction and ensure federal qualified immunity doesn’t come into play would be to limit the suit to state constitutional issues.
Even if the suit is focused on state law and the Missouri constitution, state and local law enforcement officers working on joint state/federal task forces would almost certainly be able to move the case to federal court. They are effectively treated as federal agents.
One attorney told the Tenth Amendment Center that it might be possible for officers to have their case removed to federal court to consider U.S. constitutional ramifications. But he said even then, he thinks federal courts would have to respect the state law prohibiting qualified immunity as a defense. The federal court would likely have to apply the state law as the state intended, even though the federal court might well be able to decide whether or not a U.S. constitutional violation had taken place.
Other lawyers said it wasn’t clear to them that the federal courts would have to honor the state statute. It is possible that the federal court could simply decide its jurisdiction supersedes state law and hear the case under the federal process, including the application of qualified immunity. Only time will tell how the process will play out in practice. Regardless, the state process will make it more difficult for police to simply side-step civil suits by declaring qualified immunity upfront.
WHAT’S NEXT
HB258 will be assigned to a House committee after the legislature convenes on Jan. 8.
