{"id":26532,"date":"2022-01-31T11:00:20","date_gmt":"2022-01-31T19:00:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/?p=26532"},"modified":"2022-01-31T11:00:20","modified_gmt":"2022-01-31T19:00:20","slug":"cartoon-fiction-or-qualified-immunity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/?p=26532","title":{"rendered":"Cartoon: Fiction or Qualified Immunity?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

If you like these cartoons blah blah blah you know the drill. Support my Patreon!<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

Qualified immunity is even more ridiculous<\/em> than what’s in this comic strip.<\/p>\n

Chad Reese and Patrick Jaicomo succinctly explained “qualified immunity” in the Washington Post:<\/p>\n

Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that shields all government workers \u2014 not just police \u2014 by default from federal constitutional lawsuits. Here\u2019s how it works: If your constitutional rights are violated, the government workers who violated them cannot be sued (the \u201cimmunity\u201d part) unless you can point to an earlier court case in your area holding that nearly identical conduct was unconstitutional (the \u201cqualified\u201d part). That means that government agents can knowingly and intentionally violate your rights, and you cannot sue them, thanks to qualified immunity.<\/p>\n

Over time, courts have made the requirement for a precedent with nearly identical facts narrower and narrower. For instance, in the case about siccing a police dog on a suspect who had surrendered and was sitting with his hands up, it seemed there actually was a precedent with almost identical facts. But, as law professor Joanna Schwartz writes<\/a>, “the hairsplitting… reaches absurd levels.”<\/p>\n

Nashville police officers released their dog on Alexander Baxter, a burglary suspect, who had surrendered and was sitting with his hands raised. A prior decision in the 6th Circuit had held that officers violated the Fourth Amendment when they released a police dog on a suspect who had surrendered by lying down. But the appeals court ruled that this precedent did not \u201cclearly establish\u201d that it was unconstitutional to release a police dog on a surrendering suspect sitting with his arms raised.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Sonia Sotomayor, in a dissent<\/a>, summed it up.<\/p>\n

[The Court’s ruling on qualified immunity] tells officers that they can shoot first and think later, and it tells the public that palpably unreasonable conduct will go unpunished. [The Court is] effectively treating qualified immunity as an absolute shield.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n

So many real-life qualified immunity cases are already so ludicrous that there’s no need to exaggerate them for a comic strip; I just had to find a way to frame the cases. The hardest part of writing this strip was trying to find a way to fit a description of each case into the tiny space I allotted for the captions. (I could have given myself more space, but many readers start skimming when faced with large blocks of text).<\/p>\n

I had a lot of fun drawing Earl Warren, the Supreme Court justice who wrote the first qualified immunity decision. It’s very relaxing to draw a caricature when it doesn’t matter at all if the cartoon is actually a good resemblance. But I really <\/em>had a blast drawing that German shepherd. I should have stopped cross-hatching much earlier than I did, but I was enjoying myself too much.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

One odd thing about doing comic strips critical of the police: I’ve gotten so much better at drawing cop uniforms.<\/p>\n

\n

TRANSCRIPT OF COMIC<\/strong><\/p>\n

This comic has seven panels. The first six panels are squarish, arranged in a two across three down grid; the final panel goes all the way across the bottom.<\/p>\n

PANEL 1<\/strong><\/p>\n

This panel shows Barry (the cartoonist) speaking overly cheerfully to the readers, and gesturing towards the very large letters of the title.<\/p>\n

At the top of the panel is some introductory text.<\/p>\n

TEXT: The Supreme Court decided public officials aren\u2019t responsible for violating our rights if they don\u2019t know they\u2019re violating rights.<\/p>\n

TEXT: Which brings us to our game! It\u2019s simple. You only have to guess…<\/p>\n

Very large title lettering: IS IT FICTION OR IS IT QUALIFIED IMMUNITY?<\/p>\n

BARRY (smaller letters): Winners get nothing.<\/p>\n

PANEL 2<\/strong><\/p>\n

A white man in judicial robes speaks directly to the viewer. He’s got wide eyes and is smiling, like he’s a proud father just after a baby is born. Behind him, three other white male judges look on. The front white man is holding a scroll with writing on it; but it’s swaddled in cloth, and the man is holding it as if it’s a baby.<\/p>\n

CAPTION: 1967: In the very first Q.I. case, the Supreme Court said it\u2019s okay to arrest people for being black in a coffee shop, as long as the cops believed it was against the law.<\/p>\n

JUDGE: We\u2019re calling it
\nQualified Immunity!<\/p>\n

Note: In this panel, and in all the following panels, the words “qualified immunity” are always on their own line, and alternate between being all red and all blue. These are the same colors used in the title lettering.<\/p>\n

PANEL 3<\/strong><\/p>\n

A police officer, in a uniform shirt (clack tie, badges, etc) smiles and shrugs as they talk to the readers. But they have a dog’s head instead of a human head – the head of a big German shepherd.<\/p>\n

CAPTION: 2018: The sixth circuit ruled that police couldn\u2019t be expected to know not to sic police dogs on suspects who have surrendered and are sitting on the ground.<\/p>\n

Qualified Immunity!<\/p>\n

POLICE DOG: There was just no way to know!<\/p>\n

PANEL 4<\/strong><\/p>\n

This panels shows a man in a prison guard uniform, including a billed cap and a shoulder-mounted walkie talkie, talking to someone off-panel. He looks annoyed. Behind him is a cell door, which is solid (rather than having bars) and has a small metal panel that can be opened on this side.<\/p>\n

CAPTION: 2017: A prisoner asked to buy snacks from the commissary… so they threw him in solitary confinement for over a year. The second circuit court said: \u201chow could they know?\u201d<\/p>\n

Qualified Immunity!<\/p>\n

GUARD: Einstein himself couldn\u2019t have guessed that was wrong!<\/p>\n

PANEL 5<\/strong><\/p>\n

A couple of school staff types – a balding man with half-moon glasses, wearing a jacket and tie (a stereotypical principal) and a younger woman with read hair in a thick braid, are talking to each other. The man is slapping his forehead, and the woman is looking down at the floor.<\/p>\n

CAPTION: 2009: The Supreme Court decided that school staff had no way of knowing they shouldn\u2019t strip-search a 13-year-old schoolgirl.<\/p>\n

Qualified Immunity!<\/p>\n

PRINCIPAL: We’re supposed to NOT strip-search little girls?<\/p>\n

TEACHER: Who knew?<\/p>\n

PANEL 6<\/strong><\/p>\n

A man in short-sleeved police uniform, and with a thick mustache, angrily talks to the reader. Behind him we can see a sidewalk, grass, a bit of a tree; it looks a little suburban.<\/p>\n

CAPTION: 2019: A cop shoots a kid in a yard filled with children, although he was actually trying to shoot their peaceful dog. The 11th circuit court said cops can\u2019t be expected to know better.<\/p>\n

Qualified Immunity!<\/p>\n

COP: How could I know not to shoot dogs and children? I\u2019m not a wizard!<\/p>\n

PANEL 7<\/strong><\/p>\n

This is a full-width panel at the bottom of the strip. The panel contains a caption in large, friendly letters: ANSWERS<\/p>\n

Barry the cartoonist is back, talking to the reader, grinning too wide yet looking distressed, sweating.<\/p>\n

BARRY: You guessed it\u2014 all <\/strong>these cases are real!<\/p>\n

BARRY: Because we live in a near-police state where cops are never held accountable! USA! USA!<\/p>\n

\n

This cartoon on Patreon<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

If you like these cartoons blah blah blah you know the drill. Support my Patreon! Qualified immunity is even more ridiculous than what’s in this comic strip. Chad Reese and Patrick Jaicomo succinctly explained “qualified immunity” in the Washington Post: … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[17,64,111],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-26532","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cartooning-comics","category-prisons-and-justice","category-supreme-court-issues"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26532","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=26532"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26532\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":26535,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26532\/revisions\/26535"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=26532"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=26532"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/amptoons.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=26532"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}