« Making Sure the Wealthy Do Well by Doing Good | Main | Birch Bayh RIP »

Wednesday, March 13, 2019

Another right is clearly established--flipping cops the bird

So says the Sixth Circuit (h/t: Volokh). At least for the moment--the court only affirmed denial of defendant's 12(c) motion.

Posted by Howard Wasserman on March 13, 2019 at 06:09 PM in Civil Procedure, First Amendment, Howard Wasserman, Judicial Process, Law and Politics | Permalink

Comments

If it's OK to flip judges the bird, why wouldn't it be OK to flip cops and DAs the bird?

Posted by: Birdflippers and Houseflippers | Mar 14, 2019 12:18:18 PM

just as punch line to my comment:

Then, the police officer, didn't act capriciously or arbitrarily necessarily(or not as retaliation against the first amendment right one may argue).As such, not violating clearly established right one may argue(if the clearly established would stand on first amendment).

Posted by: El roam | Mar 13, 2019 7:26:24 PM

Very interesting one indeed. But some bit different issues, have gone missing here. First, surly if the second pulling had been legally unjustified, then we have here also issue with the Fourteenth amendment, that dictates clearly, I quote in relevant part :

"....nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; "

So, at least the liberty of that young girl had been deprived by the second stopping ( but not raised in specific terms, neither in the circuit, nor in the district it seems ).

Yet, we have other issues here :

First, simple one : could he stop here, anyway, per se, in advance so,for the aggravated traffic offense. For if he could, we have bit different animal here :

For, the main issue, is the alleged capricious and arbitrary act of that police officer. It seems that the second pulling, prima facie, was stemming from retaliation desire. But if it was justified anyway ( as an aggravated offense ) and if as stated,the lesser penalty ticket was a showing of leniency, we have a bit different case it seems. For showing such disrespect to a police officer on duty, even if not formally an offense ( and I doubt it ) surly goes against public interest or policy, then, wouldn't be considered necessarily as retaliation one may argue.

Thanks

Posted by: El roam | Mar 13, 2019 7:16:47 PM

Post a comment