Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In a case involving allegations of a Fourth Amendment violation against city and numerous police officers, summary judgment for defendants is reversed where: 1) the district court erred in ruling that the defendants had probable cause as a matter of law to arrest plaintiffs for mob action as there are disputes of material fact with respect to the elements of mob action; 2) it erred in finding that defendants had probable cause to arrest plaintiffs for resisting arrest or obstructing a peace officer as there were dispute of facts as to whether the plaintiffs knowingly resisted or obstructed the officers' work; 3) it erred in finding that there was probable cause for arresting plaintiffs for battery as there are accounts, including police videotape, that create a genuine issue of material fact; 4) taking the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, a jury could find that defendant officers used excessive force in the course of plaintiffs' arrest; 5) district court erred in dismissing plaintiffs' claim against officers standing by that they were culpable for failing to intervene in the beatings. The defendant officers are not entitled to qualified immunity where Fourth Amendment is violated by a full-blown arrest not supported by probable cause. Plaintiffs' Illinois state law claims for malicious prosecution and state-law action against the City is reinstated on remand as plaintiffs have demonstrated that there is an issue of fact on these issues.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.
Argued Januarty 21, 2009
Decided August 20, 2009