Policing and Civil Rights

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday summarily reversed a 2nd Circuit ruling and held that Vermont State Police Sgt. Jacob Zorn is entitled to qualified immunity in a lawsuit by protester Shela Linton, who said she was injured when he used a wristlock to remove her from a 2015 sit‑in at the state capitol. In an unsigned per curiam opinion in Zorn v. Linton, the Court said existing precedent did not clearly establish that applying a "routine wristlock" to move a seated, resisting protester—after warning her force would be used—violated the Constitution, and emphasized that officers are shielded from damages unless prior case law makes the unlawfulness of their conduct "beyond debate." The justices faulted the 2nd Circuit for relying on its earlier Amnesty America v. West Hartford decision, finding that case too different to put Zorn on clear notice. Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, arguing that the Court improperly used the "extraordinary" step of summary reversal and that a jury could find excessive force was used against a nonviolent, passively resisting protester. The ruling reinforces the Court’s narrow view of when civil-rights plaintiffs can overcome qualified immunity in police-force cases, a doctrine already under heavy scrutiny from civil-liberties groups and activists who say it shields misconduct.