Qualified Immunity in 2024-2025 (Presented by the Federal Bar Association Civil Rights Law Section)

This opening session sets the stage for exploring qualified immunity doctrine, noting its significance in civil rights law. The presentation highlights that even mainstream entities like Ben & Jerry’s have engaged with this important legal topic.

Kyle Kaiser traces the evolution of qualified immunity from Monroe v. Pape through Ashcroft v. Al-Kidd, explaining how the doctrine shifted from subjective good faith to objective standards. The session covers key cases including Harlow v. Fitzgerald, Pearson v. Callahan, and the Supreme Court’s error correction era of the 2010s.

Nicole Johnston presents data from 211 published Court of Appeals cases between January 2024 and February 2025. The analysis reveals that nearly 90% of cases involve police or corrections defendants, qualified immunity is denied in 30-40% of published cases, and the Second, Third, and Tenth Circuits have the highest denial rates.

Kyle Kaiser and Nicole Johnston examine significant recent cases applying or rejecting qualified immunity, including Rupp v. Buffalo (retaliatory arrest), Ramirez v. Killian (shooting of non-aggressive dog), and Hughes v. Garcia (false arrest of Good Samaritan). The session contrasts circuit approaches, particularly the Fifth Circuit’s acceptance versus Eleventh Circuit’s rejection of persuasive authority from other jurisdictions.

This session examines stalled reform efforts including congressional legislation, textual challenges based on missing statutory language, and notable judicial opinions questioning the doctrine’s foundations. Despite scholarly criticism and judicial skepticism from judges like Carlton Reeves and James Ho, qualified immunity remains firmly entrenched.

The final session provides opportunity for attendees to ask questions and engage in discussion about qualified immunity doctrine. Presenters address practical implications and emerging trends in this evolving area of civil rights law.