Fifth Circuit Sends Anonymous Cop's Lawsuit Againt Protest Organizer To The State's Top Court, Suggests Getting Injured Is Part Of The Job

from the ambulance-drivers-can't-be-ambulance-chasers dept

A decision that created a chilling effect on protected First Amendment activity is headed to yet another court to get the details sorted out.

It’s been more than four years since an anonymous police officer sued over injuries they sustained while responding to a protest in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The officer was struck in the face by a thrown chunk of concrete. Rather than recognize this was an unfortunate side effect of being in the law enforcement business, the officer sued activist DeRay Mckesson — who decidedly did not throw the object that struck the officer.

The officer’s argument was that Mckesson’s organization of the protest, as well as his decision to lead protesters out to block the highway in front of the police station, made him at least indirectly responsible for the injuries the officer sustained.

Somehow this lawsuit and its ridiculous premise survived two passes by the Fifth Circuit Appeals Court, with its second decision noting how angry it was that it was forced to take another look at its inexplicable first decision: the one that said that Mckesson should have know that leading protesters out into a street would result in the injury of police officers.

By ignoring the foreseeable risk of violence that his actions created, Mckesson failed to exercise reasonable care in conducting his demonstration.

This twice-made decision was appealed and the Supreme Court said the Fifth Circuit got it wrong twice. However, it didn’t necessarily affirm the right to protest and the right of protest leaders to be free of bullshit secondary liability claims. But it said the Fifth Circuit — while not incorrect to raise the issue about liability under Louisiana state law — should not have taken it on itself to define the contours of the state law and how it applied to Mckesson’s actions in relation to the officer’s injury.

The Fifth Circuit’s third pass [PDF] follows the Supreme Court’s instructions. It is sending this case to the Louisiana state Supreme Court to handle the open state law question. But it does so with some additional examination of applicable state laws that indicate the anonymous cop may find no one to sue by the time the state court is done examining it. And this is at least partly due to law blog Volokh Conspiracy and its titular creator, Eugene Volokh.

In the meantime our attention has been drawn to a separate aspect of Louisiana law, the Professional Rescuer’s Doctrine, that could be dispositive. That doctrine, put succinctly, is a judge-made rule that “essentially states that a professional rescuer, such as a fireman or a policeman, who is injured in the performance of his duties, assumes the risk of such an injury and is not entitled to damages.” Gann v. Matthews, 873 So. 2d 701, 705 (La. App. 1st Cir. 2004) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). The parties disagree as to whether this doctrine bars Officer Doe from recovering. See Mckesson Suppl. Br., Dec. 18, 2020, Doc. No. 00515679716; Doe Suppl. Br., Dec. 18, 2020, Doc. No. 00515678655. We have found limited guidance from the opinions of the Supreme Court of Louisiana on how this doctrine might apply to the particular facts of this case. Because we find this to be a close question of law, which also raises a significant issue of state policy, we further take this opportunity to respectfully elicit guidance on this issue from the Supreme Court of Louisiana.

The Fifth Circuit provides a link to the Volokh Conspiracy post raising this issue, one that called the as-yet-unraised local legal doctrine a “certain win” for Mckesson.

That’s where things stand now. Hopefully, the state Supreme Court will remind this officer that the flipside of having a lot of government-granted power is assuming the risks that come with the position. The ability to quell and/or contain protests comes with the possibility of injury. And when it’s impossible to discover who actually threw the projectile that resulted in injury, the acceptable response isn’t suing protest organizers, unaffiliated protest movements, and Twitter hashtags.

Filed Under: , , , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Fifth Circuit Sends Anonymous Cop's Lawsuit Againt Protest Organizer To The State's Top Court, Suggests Getting Injured Is Part Of The Job”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
16 Comments
That One Guy (profile) says:

Let's apply that equally shall we?

Well if that’s really the argument they want to push then I say let’s apply the ‘Turnabout is fair play’ test and any time someone is injured by a cop who can’t be identified for whatever reason the police chief can be personally sued for the injury.

If ‘a cop was injured dealing with a group of people, therefore the head of that group is liable’ is the standard they want to set then it seems only fair to apply it to them as well, and as such I look forward to the plethora of lawsuits aimed at police department heads in that area of the country which they will of course accept as entirely reasonable due to being based upon their own legal arguments.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

OKAY. I've spent a while confirming TD is locked down!

At least on Maz’s last. — Oh, here too, after several attempts…

IF anyone were to admit they see how many I put in the alleged "Moderation" queue which is nothing but a bit bucket, it’d HELP, thanks.


What I get sez:

Free Speech [ HA! Only if agree!]

Comment Held for Moderation…

Thanks for your comment.
It will be reviewed by our staff before it is posted.

Only you hard-core neo-liberals can put the LIE of "Free Speech" right above another LIE of comment "moderated"!

Tactic I’m trying to overcome your faulty comment system, which appears contrary to your promises of "Free speech" and "comment open to all" is four windows open at once, and repeating. You should really fix this lousy system, ’cause looks exactly like viewpoint discrimination.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Re: OKAY. I've spent a while confirming TD is locked down!

yawns

This is me screaming into the void but…

Moderation is a real thing.

Outside of your stupid happy ass, I am quite possibly the person who ends up in moderation the most among TD posters.

Funny, they manage to approve my posts & not have to reconstruct them… its almost like there is a queue & if you stopped filling it over & over & over with the exact same thing you might notice that.

Did you actually have anything to say about this story or are you just furiously masturbating while posting the same things over & over screaming how you won?

You aren’t entitled to post here, you are a guest.

Please stop slapping your dick on the table, we can all see it and we are not impressed.

If you want to impress us, try posting just 1 time instead of 100 and watch what happens.

Try posting something actually on the topic at hand.

In the alternative, please fsck all the way off you looney asswipe.

goes to the naughty corner for bothering to address the dumbass

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
This comment has been deemed funny by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: OKAY. I've spent a while confirming TD is locked down!

Free speech doesn’t mean unlimited freedom to abuse and troll and spam though. What you’re asking for is the ability to dominate the community discussions by spamming a lot and making the discussions functionally unreadable. That leads to other users abandoning the discussion.

There’s a great website you should visit that talks about these kinds of issues. They even tag all the articles so you can easily find related articles on the same topic: https://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=content+moderation

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: OKAY. I've spent a while confirming TD is locked down!

You’ll notice this stuff all showed up eventually, and nobody censored you.

HOWEVER, there’s nothing wrong with discrimination, even viewpoint discrimination. It all depends on context.

In this case, your post is argumentative, abusive, off-topic and contains references to falsehoods.

I tend to discriminate against such "viewpoints" with extreme prejudice.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

IF anyone were to admit they see how many I put in the alleged "Moderation" queue which is nothing but a bit bucket, it’d HELP, thanks.

It’d help… what, exactly? Besides proving that you spam the site so relentlessly the taps have to get tightened a little?

four windows open at once, and repeating

Like that, see. This doesn’t "help". It proves you’re an obsessed fuckwit. I don’t know what kind of universe you live in where that constitutes "help".

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

"By ignoring the foreseeable risk of violence that his actions created, Mckesson failed to exercise reasonable care in conducting his demonstration."

LMFTFY

By ignoring the foreseeable risk of violence that their actions created, the court failed to exercise reasonable care in pretending that officers needed to have cases explicitly telling them murdering handcuffed suspects was a crime.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: Re:

By ignoring the foreseeable risk of violence that their actions created, the court failed to exercise reasonable care in pretending that officers needed to have cases explicitly telling them murdering handcuffed suspects in an extremely specific way was a crime.

Fixed for horrifying accuracy because when it comes to police it’s not enough to tell them that something blatantly unacceptable is in fact unacceptable it needs to be spelled out in exacting detail otherwise it’s unfair to expect them to grasp such complex subjects as ‘people have rights’ and ‘killing people is bad’.

Lostinlodos (profile) says:

This is still going on?
A stupid suit.
Go after your he person who hurt you.

As for the “ “out to block the highway in front of the police station”
THe other (protestor) shithead should be jailed for that.
Talk about disregard for public safety.

Somewhere along the way people will learn; play in traffic get run over!
But that’s a side point.

A case against the organiser is like the case now against a goatee for VPN services being dragged over pirates.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...
Older Stuff
12:15 Federal Agent Stupidly Threatens Twitter User With Arrest Over Protected First Amendment Expression (57)
09:31 How The Dobbs Decision Will Lead To Attacks On Free Speech; Or, Why Democrats Need To Stop Undermining Free Speech (52)
10:46 Devin Nunes Loses Yet Another SLAPP Suit, This Time In California (21)
09:28 Philippines Orders Critical News Organization, Rappler, Shut Down; Just As Rappler's Founder Argues Against Free Speech (11)
09:19 Clarence Thomas REALLY Wants To Make It Easier For The Powerful To Sue People For Criticizing Them (32)
15:39 Twitter Successfully Quashes Sketchy Copyright Subpoena Over Billionaire's Critic On Twitter (233)
12:14 Giant Private Prison Company Goes To Court To Try To Get Lawyer To Stop Tweeting About Them (15)
10:48 UK Approves Extradition Of Julian Assange, Allowing The US Government To Continue Criminalizing Journalism (46)
12:27 Lawsuit Alleges Massachusetts School Officials Violated First Amendment By Abusing State's Wiretap Law (2)
09:38 Using Rap Lyrics As Evidence Of A Criminal Conspiracy Threatens First Amendment, Unlikely To Succeed (28)
09:33 Virginia Attorney, Congressional Hopeful File Doomed Lawsuit Against Barnes & Noble Over 'Obscene' Books (34)
09:34 Stop Saying Elon Musk 'Supports Free Speech.' He Appears To Be Actively Against That (41)
09:28 The Rich And Powerful Are Abusing 'Privacy' Laws To Silence Journalists And Authors (24)
12:00 Musk, Twitter, Bluesky & The Future Of Content Moderation (Part II) (36)
09:30 Musk, Twitter, Why The First Amendment Can’t Resolve Content Moderation (Part I) (351)
15:32 New Yorker's Famed Fact Checking Crew Apparently Unaware Of The 1st Amendment? (57)
12:31 White House Sets Up Monumentally Stupidly Named 'Disinformation Governance Board' (26)
09:30 Reality Check: Twitter Actually Was Already Doing Most Of The Things Musk Claims He Wants The Company To Do (But Better) (336)
12:34 Some Good News: Kentucky Passes A Good Anti-SLAPP Law (3)
09:31 Twitter's Legal Team Has Been An Aggressive Defender Of Free Speech; Will That Continue Under Musk? (420)
12:09 Florida Republican Gov't Officials Bend Over Backwards To Tell Everyone That, Yes, Absolutely, They Are Punishing Disney For Its Speech (210)
11:13 NY Times Uses Anti-SLAPP Law To Sue Guy Who SLAPPed It (19)
09:32 Why Moderating Content Actually Does More To Support The Principles Of Free Speech (77)
09:30 Trumpists Admit That Their Own Social Media Platforms Aren't Much Fun When They Can't Use Them To Own The Libs (79)
15:36 On Elon Musk And Free Speech (164)
12:12 The 'Culture Of Free Speech' Includes Criticism Of Others' Speech; Get Over It (287)
13:30 Cops Who Sued Journalist For Reporting On Their Poor Handling Of A Rape Case Lose Their Defamation Lawsuit (40)
10:48 Jehovah's Witnesses Abusing Copyright Subpoena Process To Unmask Critics (18)
15:35 Devin Nunes Loses Appeal Of SLAPP Suit Against Liz Mair (16)
13:33 First Amendment Group Tells Appeals Court University Officials Shouldn't Have Access To Qualified Immunity (15)
More arrow