Gillian Isabelle
92 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. Arguendo 95
The doctrine of qualified immunity was born in a time of turmoil in the United States. A Supreme Court-created defense meant to shield government officials from petty lawsuits, qualified immunity has become a highly criticized doctrine. This criticism is representative of the ever-growing concern that government officials, especially police officers, are far too often immune from punishment. This Note summarizes the historical background and significance of the qualified immunity doctrine within the sphere of the Civil Rights movement and its evolution into the pro-police doctrine it has become today. This Note further discusses the current circuit split concerning where the burden of proof lies in qualified immunity cases. If this doctrine is to continue, the Supreme Court must resolve this split and should return to a burden that more squarely addresses the goals of qualified immunity propagated by the Supreme Court: one that is shared between litigants, requiring the plaintiff to allege a constitutional violation and a government official defendant to show why their conduct was not clearly established, thus entitling them to a qualified immunity defense.
