Question - now that a district court has found the arrest unconstitutional, can any law officers in that judicial district claim that they were not aware that the arrest was illegal - that is, officers will not have limited immunity in this situation.
And given the issue reviewed at the Fifth Circuit - should the officers have known this arrest was illegal - can we infer that there will be no limited liability in this situation going forward?
So news outlets can benefit from the advertising and related commercial 'benefits' (revenue) arising from oeople wanting to watch or read the information they relay from government officials? Someone better call Saul.
Great summary of a complex issue.
Question - now that a district court has found the arrest unconstitutional, can any law officers in that judicial district claim that they were not aware that the arrest was illegal - that is, officers will not have limited immunity in this situation.
And given the issue reviewed at the Fifth Circuit - should the officers have known this arrest was illegal - can we infer that there will be no limited liability in this situation going forward?
Follow up - It seems that a mire interesting case will follow the Pentagon's clear violation of a court order to provide access to reporters.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense/4501137/pentagon-announces-new-press-restrictions-judge-revokes-press-ban/?utm_source=Daily%20on%20Defense%2003242026_03/24/2026&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=WEX_Daily%20on%20Defense&rid=24114886&env=992574a77052511f2a74216d71d7f930351fbd1cc3b641bd5e89ce7ca8a9f551
So news outlets can benefit from the advertising and related commercial 'benefits' (revenue) arising from oeople wanting to watch or read the information they relay from government officials? Someone better call Saul.