44 votes

Victory: Unanimous Supreme Court Rules that Citizens Can Hold Federal Government Liable for Abuse by Law Enforcement Officers

March 28, 2013 | Rutherford Institute

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In its ruling in Millbrook v. United States, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court has concluded that the U.S. government may be held liable for abuses intentionally carried out by law enforcement officers in the course of their employment. The Court’s ruling dovetails with arguments put forward by The Rutherford Institute in its amicus brief, which urged the Court to enforce the plain meaning of federal statutes allowing citizens to sue the government for injuries intentionally inflicted by law enforcement officers.

In striking down lower court rulings, the justices held that the courts had erred in dismissing a prisoner’s lawsuit alleging that three prison guards had brutally and sexually assaulted him. The lower courts justified their ruling under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), which allows individuals to sue the government for misconduct by law enforcement officials only if the injury inflicted occurs while the officers are in the course of making an arrest or seizure, or executing a search. In their amicus brief, Rutherford Institute attorneys asked the Supreme Court to protect citizens from government brutality by eliminating the restriction on government liability.

“Hopefully, the Supreme Court’s ruling in Millbrook will send a strong message to the government’s various law enforcement agencies that they need to do a better job of policing their employees—whether they’re police officers or prison guards—and holding them accountable to respecting citizens’ rights, especially while on the job,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “At a time when the courts are increasingly giving deference to the police and prioritizing security over civil liberties, this ruling is at least an encouraging glimmer in the gloom.”


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Murder has no statute of

Murder has no statute of limitations.

Then The Argument Will Be What Constitutes Abuse...

Never ending play on words...

Just like the argument about drones and when then can be used on U.S. citizens...The government or State department will define what is meant by enemy combatant or whatever term, including, but not limited to what immediate combative threat means...

Listen! They are going to do whatever they want no matter what the efing SCOTUS rules...PERIOD!

would have to research more, but does this mean that it's

the de jure end to the utterly UnConstitutional and 100000000000000000000000000000% complete legal fiction of "qualified immunity" BS?

Predictions in due Time...

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

Hmmmm....partial victory at best.

I'd rather have seen sovereign immunity struck down and we get the right back to PUNISH THE INDIVIDUAL WHO DID THE CRIME.

Be brave, be brave, the Myan pilot needs no aeroplane.

well the problem with that...

if you only punish the one who has committed the crime then their is a possibility that their superiors can manipulate some of those air heads in causing harm for corporate or political agenda's ... that's a slippery road...

..maybe the Constitution can

..maybe the Constitution can still save us from the Ghestapo-like tactics occurring almost daily now. We need to constantly defend it, and our freedom..

Now THIS is where we need to focus our attention.

Please stop watching the adult version of "The Muppets" (aka con-gress).

I can hardly wait for the suits against the TSA.

Maybe now the Branch Davidian and MOVE survivors can sue the FBI Hostage Rescue team. Lon Horiuchi, are you listening?

I hope this starts happening ASAP (TSA brought to court)

and justice for the Waco survivors and MOVE survivors is overdue.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

The Rutherford Institute has been defending the Bill of Rights..

for a long time! Bump and Thanks!

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Bump and Thanks!

Bump and Thanks!