zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. egilli+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-06-01 18:30:01
Why would anyone be a second-mover if the first-mover lost the case? There's still no precedent to build off of.
replies(1): >>quickp+k5
◧
2. quickp+k5[view] [source] 2020-06-01 18:57:27
>>egilli+(OP)
Good point -- appellate courts have been known to make rulings of the effect "this govt employee gets qualified immunity, but future govt employees are put on notice," but this is far from every case.
replies(2): >>alasda+Q9 >>egilli+BC
◧◩
3. alasda+Q9[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-01 19:21:39
>>quickp+k5
The issue is that they are “put on notice” for extremely precise things and it can usually be argued that technically the new case is very slightly different to the old case and so qualified immunity applies again.
◧◩
4. egilli+BC[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-01 21:47:40
>>quickp+k5
I didn't know courts had that option - thank you!
[go to top]