WASHINGTON - George Floyd's death at the hands of a policeman in May 2020 gave interconscious efforts to reform a legal defense called "qualified immunity" that could protect police officers even if they violate the constitution.
Congress calls for the repeal of the defense bill.
Several cases piled up by the Supreme Court urged judges to intervene.
The ink overflowed a lot.
Then, nothing happened.
With the fifth anniversary of Floyd's death this weekend, Congress still hasn't passed any legislation seeking reform, let alone abolishing qualified immunities. The Supreme Court rejected dozens of cases requiring it.
What minor changes have happened through court rulings or state legislative actions, and have little actual impact on the country.
For Karen Blum, a professor at the Suffolk University School of Law in Boston and a longtime critic of qualified immunity, the situation is frustrating.
"It was the first time since George Floyd that I was really optimistic, very positive, and no matter how little, doing something," she said. "But nothing, I didn't happen."
The doctrine first adopted by the Supreme Court in 1967 brought the benefit of doubt to government officials when it violated the constitution.
When the plaintiff makes a federal civil rights claim, the defendants - including police officers who have been claimed by excessive force under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, can be argued that they were not "exactly established" when suspected violations of their conduct violated the Constitution. If qualified immunity is granted, the lawsuit is dismissed and the plaintiff will never have the opportunity to negotiate a settlement or trial.
In 2020, a Reuters investigation found that judges increasingly grant qualified immunities under the direction of the Supreme Court.
The law enforcement community strongly defended the concept, saying officials need to act sincerely in order to have confidence in making split decisions in extremely dangerous situations.
The fraternity police order of the state group representing law enforcement personnel did not respond to a request for comment.
Floyd was killed by Minneapolis policeman Derek Chauvin, causing immediate debate on police violence, especially against black people.
But before that, there was a quiet inter-ministerial effort to reform qualified immunity and get weird bedheads like the left-leaning American Civil Liberties Union and the Cato Institute of Liberals. They had filed a summary in the Supreme Court, hoping to convince the justices to take a new view of the doctrine and consider modifying it - or could abandon it altogether.
In the summer of 2020, as racial justice protests became fierce, the Supreme Court and Congress both considered whether to take action.
The court quickly avoided the issue and refused to hear a series of cases requiring reconsideration of qualified immunity in June 2020.
Ten days later, the democratically controlled House passed the George Floyd justice in the Police Act, including many police reform measures on eligible immunities and other issues. But this encountered a headwind and lost momentum in the Republican-controlled Senate.
"The Republican uneasiness is the real explanation there, and I don't think there is any reason to think that explanation will get better," said Clark Neily, an attorney at the Cato Institute.
Rep. Hank Johnson, co-sponsor of George Floyd's legislation, said there were plans to reintroduce it during the current Congress, but he "had no confidence" that would give Republicans any attention to Republicans who control both rooms.
"We will spend some time in this country and we will pass that legislation," he said.
Meanwhile, in cases involving shocking claims, the court continues to grant qualified immunities to police and other government officials:
However, there are small signs of gradual change.
Some judges criticized the way qualified immunity is applied, joining a few ways that have done the same thing by 2020. This approach has penetrated some recent rulings, following case law.
Georgia attorney Chris Balch, who represented the police department in this case, said the thumbs up “in favour of officers” over the past five years, meaning defense attorneys need to be prepared for trial.
He cites the January 2024 ruling by the Atlanta-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit that denied the immunity of a black inmate to prison intake officers, who revealed that he stabbed a white man for racial motives and then murdered his white roommate.
The Supreme Court also has a silver lining for reform advocates, which ruled in November 2020 to support a Texas prison inmate detained on dirty conditions. The Supreme Court overturned a lower court that said qualified immunity protected prison officials.
A brief effort to develop state-level legislation after Congress’s reform efforts would create an alternative way to prosecute officials under the laws of these states, thus rendering qualified immunity ineffective as a defense. Despite such laws being enacted by a few countries, the movement encountered considerable resistance elsewhere.
Recently, President Donald Trump’s re-election has somehow waving the pendulum in another direction in the national political arena.
When Trump signed a pro-law enforcement order last month, he stressed the importance of ensuring officers are not legally responsible for their actions.
The order said the Trump administration will take action to “provide legal resources and compensation to law enforcement officers who unfairly incur expenses and liabilities” and called on officials to “strengthen and expand legal protections for officials.”
White House spokesman Harrison Fields said Trump's policing plan showed he "fulfilled his campaign promise to make the United States safe again." He added that the administration is committed to reverse the “failed policies” supported by Democrats.
Given the political environment, qualified immune critic Bloom remains pessimistic and will soon see any major changes.
"Qualified immunity will remain here," she said.