None
EN
Qualified immunity: Sometimes the court never answers whether the force was constitutional
['Ken Wallentine Is The Chief Of The West Jordan', 'Utah', 'Police Department', 'Former Chief Of Law Enforcement For The Utah Attorney General. He Has Served Over Four Decades In Public Safety', 'Is A Legal Expert', 'Editor Of Xiphos', 'A Monthly National Criminal Procedure Newsletter. He Is A Member Of The Board Of Directors Of The Institute For The Prevention Of In-Custody Death', 'Serves As A Use Of Force Consultant In State', 'Federal Criminal', 'Civil Litigation Across The Nation.']
News, Training, Products for Police, Law Enforcement Professionals
Qualified immunity can shield an officer from civil liability even when a court does not decide whether the officer’s use of deadly force violated the Fourth Amendment.
The decision shows why qualified immunity cases often turn on factual comparisons with prior rulings.
2026)Few cases illustrate the purpose — and the current controversy — of qualified immunity better than Searles v. City of Houston.
This approach reflects the Supreme Court’s repeated instruction that courts may dispose of qualified immunity cases without deciding difficult constitutional questions when clearly established law is lacking.
Qualified immunity is not a substitute for sound tactics, patience or good judgment.