Dec 2, 2024 Story by: Editor
The Legal Defense Fund (LDF) and the National Urban League, represented by O’Melveny & Myers LLP, have submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Barnes v. Felix. They are urging the court to reject the “moment of threat” doctrine, which they argue weakens police accountability, promotes unnecessary violence, and disproportionately impacts Black individuals.
The brief highlights that focusing only on the immediate moment when force is used, without considering prior events, undermines Fourth Amendment protections. Ignoring the sequence of events leading up to a confrontation discourages de-escalation by police and increases the likelihood of violence during interactions. The filing emphasizes that the Fourth Amendment requires courts to evaluate force based on the total circumstances, allowing a complete view of police behavior, including how racial biases may lead officers to wrongly perceive threats.
Marc H. Morial, President and CEO of the National Urban League, stated:
“We cannot condone the idea that an officer can willingly put themselves in harm’s way and use their own actions as justification for deadly force. This interpretation of the law flies in the face of an officer’s responsibility to de-escalate encounters and resolve conflict without violence whenever possible. We need greater police accountability, not a license to inflict brutality.”
Catherine Logue, Assistant Counsel at the Legal Defense Fund, added:
“Black people experience disproportionate rates of police violence—including deadly force—each year. Far too often, these racialized harms are a direct result of racial stereotypes and other forms of bias that cause officers to inaccurately assess threats in encounters with Black individuals. A legal doctrine that shields discriminatory police conduct from judicial review essentially subjects Black people to greater risk without recourse or accountability.”
Melissa Cassel-Walker, Counsel at O’Melveny & Myers LLP, expressed cautious optimism:
“We are proud to work alongside LDF and NUL on this crucial issue. And we are cautiously optimistic that the Supreme Court will understand that the moment of threat not only conflicts with established Fourth Amendment doctrine but also makes policing more dangerous for civilians and officers alike.” Source: LDF
