NewsA US appeals court on Thursday reversed a lower court’s ruling that police in Phoenix, Arizona, used excessive force against protesters outside a Donald Trump rally.
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that qualified immunity applied to the police interactions because the protestors did not cite a case that “could have ‘clearly establish[ed]’ that Defendants’ use of force…was objectively unreasonable.” The appeals court explained that qualified immunity is granted to government officials “unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.'”
The case concerns a rally at the Phoenix Convention Center on August 22, 2017. Protestor Ira Yedlin was part of a crowd aggressively pushing a fence separating the Free Speech Zone from a security zone distancing the anti-Trump protestors from the rally. The police fired pepper balls that struck and bruised Yedlin. The court found that the police did not use excessive force because the breach would have been “an immediate and substantial threat to the safety of the officers, nearby members of the public, and potentially [Trump’s] motorcade.”
Legal director for the ACLU of Arizona Jared Keenan responded to the ruling in a press statement, stating: “Once again, qualified immunity prevents public accountability when the police engage in violence or violate individuals’ rights, including the rights of peaceful protesters. Unfortunately, today’s ruling will only encourage the Phoenix Police to continue to engage in unconstitutional behavior with impunity.”
The US District Court for the District of Arizona previously ruled against each claim before trial except for three plaintiffs’ excessive force claims under the Fourth Amendment. The defendants appealed to have those excessive force claims ruled in their favor without trial based on qualified immunity.
On August 22, 2017, then-president Trump held a rally at the Phoenix Convention Center after his controversial response to then-recent riots from the Unite the Right rally. Anti-Trump protestors went to a police-established security zone distanced from the rally called the “Free Speech Zone,” but were dispersed by police after engaging in violence.
Protestors and community organizations sued members of the Phoenix Police Department on September 4, 2018, for allegedly dispersing the crowd of protesters with excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, using violence to deprive the protesters of their free speech under the First Amendment, and viewpoint-discriminating against the protesters in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
Protestor Cynthia Guillen was hit by a projectile while walking away from the security fence after police deployed inert smoke in front of the fence in response to protestors “throwing rocks, water bottles, and other objects at an increasing rate.” She claimed that she suffered severe pain for several days, partially lost movement in her leg, and required the use of an inhaler.
After many protestors dispersed, protestor Janet Travis “was targeted with a ‘muzzle blast’ — a burst of chemical powder with irritating properties — as well as pepper spray and an unknown projectile” after intentionally approaching a police line outside the Free Speech Zone. This resulted in a “burning sensation in her eyes for roughly fifteen minutes, a temporary cough, and bruising on her backside that caused her to miss a day of work.”
