{"id":964,"date":"2007-04-30T13:09:16","date_gmt":"2007-04-30T13:00:55","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2007-04-30T13:00:55","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=964","title":{"rendered":"SCOTUS decides police car ramming fleeing suspect was reasonable"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Supreme Court decided Scott v. Harris<\/a> today holding that a police officer ramming a fleeing suspect’s car that left the suspect paralyzed was reasonable under Tennessee v. Garner<\/em>. The opinions page<\/a> on the Supreme Court’s website includes a link to the police car video (also linked via NY Times article<\/a>). The Westlaw cite for the opinion is 2007 WL 1237851. The opinion was 8-1, authored by Scalia, dissent by Stevens.<\/p>\n

The Court’s syllabus is here:<\/p>\n

Deputy Timothy Scott, petitioner here, terminated a high-speed pursuit of respondent\u2019s car by applying his push bumper to the rear of the vehicle, causing it to leave the road and crash. Respondent was rendered quadriplegic. He filed suit under 42 U.S.C. \u00a71983 alleging, inter alia, the use of excessive force resulting in an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. The District Court denied Scott\u2019s summary judgment motion, which was based on qualified immunity. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed on interlocutory appeal, concluding, inter alia, that Scott\u2019s actions could constitute \u201cdeadly force\u201d under Tennessee v. Garner<\/em>, 471 U.S. 1; that the use of such force in this context would violate respondent\u2019s constitutional right to be free from excessive force during a seizure; and that a reasonable jury could so find.<\/p>\n

Held:<\/em> Because the car chase respondent initiated posed a substantial and immediate risk of serious physical injury to others, Scott\u2019s attempt to terminate the chase by forcing respondent off the road was reasonable, and Scott is entitled to summary judgment. Pp. 3-13.<\/p>\n

(a) Qualified immunity requires resolution of a \u201cthreshold question: Taken in the light most favorable to the party asserting the injury, do the facts alleged show the officer\u2019s conduct violated a constitutional right?\u201d Saucier v. Katz<\/em>, 533 U. S. 194, 201. Pp. 3-4. <\/p>\n

(b) The record in this case includes a videotape capturing the events in question. Where, as here, the record blatantly contradicts the plaintiff\u2019s version of events so that no reasonable jury could believe it, a court should not adopt that version of the facts for purposes of ruling on a summary judgment motion. Pp. 5-8. <\/p>\n

(c) Viewing the facts in the light depicted by the videotape, it is clear that Deputy Scott did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Pp. 8-13. <\/p>\n

(i) Garner<\/em> did not establish a magical on\/off switch that triggers rigid preconditions whenever an officer\u2019s actions constitute \u201cdeadly force.\u201d The Court there simply applied the Fourth Amendment\u2019s \u201creasonableness\u201d test to the use of a particular type of force in a particular situation. That case has scant applicability to this one, which has vastly different facts. Whether or not Scott\u2019s actions constituted \u201cdeadly force,\u201d what matters is whether those actions were reasonable. Pp. 8-10. <\/p>\n

(ii) In determining a seizure\u2019s reasonableness, the Court balances the nature and quality of the intrusion on the individual\u2019s Fourth Amendment interests against the importance of the governmental interests allegedly justifying the intrusion. United States v. Place,<\/em> 462 U.S. 696, 703. In weighing the high likelihood of serious injury or death to respondent that Scott\u2019s actions posed against the actual and imminent threat that respondent posed to the lives of others, the Court takes account of the number of lives at risk and the relative culpability of the parties involved. Respondent intentionally placed himself and the public in danger by unlawfully engaging in reckless, high-speed flight; those who might have been harmed had Scott not forced respondent off the road were entirely innocent. The Court concludes that it was reasonable for Scott to take the action he did. It rejects respondent\u2019s argument that safety could have been assured if the police simply ceased their pursuit. The Court rules that a police officer\u2019s attempt to terminate a dangerous high-speed car chase that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk of serious injury or death. Pp. 10-13.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Officer Scott’s brief is here<\/a>, and Harris’s brief is here<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-964","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/964","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=964"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/964\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=964"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=964"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=964"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}