If you’re reading this, chances are you’re not an undecided voter. But if you don’t want Donald Trump to become president again, between now and November you’ll need to convince as many as you can to cast their ballot for Joe Biden. With the help of some of the smartest strategists, pollsters, and organizers in politics today, host Jon Favreau explores the minds of voters who will decide the 2024 election, and gives you everything you need to persuade the persuadables in your life. Season 4 ...
…
continue reading
Content provided by The Federalist Society. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by The Federalist Society or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!
Go offline with the Player FM app!
Does One Size Fit All? Qualified Immunity Inside and Outside Split-Second Policing Decisions
MP3•Episode home
Manage episode 502998192 series 1782649
Content provided by The Federalist Society. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by The Federalist Society or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
Qualified immunity shields all government officials from suit when the constitutional rights they violate are not “clearly established.” Yet the public conversation often centers on police officers. Supreme Court cases on the doctrine frequently involve split-second law enforcement decisions, and when Congress considered reform in the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2020, its focus was again on police, excluding other officials.
How should we think about qualified immunity in the policing context versus other government contexts, particularly when officials are not acting under urgent time pressure? Should there be a single, uniform standard, or should the doctrine be tailored to the circumstances faced by the defendant? And if tailoring is appropriate, should that responsibility rest with the political branches rather than the courts?
Join us for a discussion on the origins, evolution, and future of qualified immunity—and bring your questions.
Featuring:
Elliott Averett, Attorney, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP
William Most, Attorney, Most & Associates
(Moderator) Anya Bidwell, Attorney, Institute for Justice
…
continue reading
How should we think about qualified immunity in the policing context versus other government contexts, particularly when officials are not acting under urgent time pressure? Should there be a single, uniform standard, or should the doctrine be tailored to the circumstances faced by the defendant? And if tailoring is appropriate, should that responsibility rest with the political branches rather than the courts?
Join us for a discussion on the origins, evolution, and future of qualified immunity—and bring your questions.
Featuring:
Elliott Averett, Attorney, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP
William Most, Attorney, Most & Associates
(Moderator) Anya Bidwell, Attorney, Institute for Justice
1033 episodes
MP3•Episode home
Manage episode 502998192 series 1782649
Content provided by The Federalist Society. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by The Federalist Society or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
Qualified immunity shields all government officials from suit when the constitutional rights they violate are not “clearly established.” Yet the public conversation often centers on police officers. Supreme Court cases on the doctrine frequently involve split-second law enforcement decisions, and when Congress considered reform in the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2020, its focus was again on police, excluding other officials.
How should we think about qualified immunity in the policing context versus other government contexts, particularly when officials are not acting under urgent time pressure? Should there be a single, uniform standard, or should the doctrine be tailored to the circumstances faced by the defendant? And if tailoring is appropriate, should that responsibility rest with the political branches rather than the courts?
Join us for a discussion on the origins, evolution, and future of qualified immunity—and bring your questions.
Featuring:
Elliott Averett, Attorney, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP
William Most, Attorney, Most & Associates
(Moderator) Anya Bidwell, Attorney, Institute for Justice
…
continue reading
How should we think about qualified immunity in the policing context versus other government contexts, particularly when officials are not acting under urgent time pressure? Should there be a single, uniform standard, or should the doctrine be tailored to the circumstances faced by the defendant? And if tailoring is appropriate, should that responsibility rest with the political branches rather than the courts?
Join us for a discussion on the origins, evolution, and future of qualified immunity—and bring your questions.
Featuring:
Elliott Averett, Attorney, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP
William Most, Attorney, Most & Associates
(Moderator) Anya Bidwell, Attorney, Institute for Justice
1033 episodes
All episodes
×Welcome to Player FM!
Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.