This law review essay takes the Supreme Court to task for failing to recognize and apply widely-accepted (and sometimes evidence-based) professional police standards to cases involving use of force, particularly pursuits and firing into moving vehicles, resorting instead to the inevitably vague “reasonableness” language in the 4th amendment.


One Response to “Lazy SCOTUS”

  1. Ashley Says:

    Two points come to mind after reading this essay.
    First, it appears to minimize the difference between agency policy, think tank recommendations, DOJ guidance, etc, and the federal constitutional standard as articulated in the case law.
    Also, Scott v. Harris was, at its essence, a use of force case. Shortly after that decision, a conference speaker, a highly-regarded police attorney, asked whether a pursuit could be terminated by a sniper on an overpass. He wasn’t endorsing the idea, just asking the question, but Mullenix v. Luna shouldn’t have been a complete surprise…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: