County of Los Angeles v. Mendez, et al.

"The central purpose of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is to “give a remedy to parties deprived of constitutional rights, privileges and immunities by an Official’s abuse of his position.” Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 172 (1961). Petitioners’ proposed rule—that the reasonableness of Fourth Amendment seizures be evaluated without regard to any facts but those at the exact moment an officer applies force—flies in the face of this purpose, as well as the Court’s longstanding precedent.  If adopted, this rule would prevent innocent parties injured or killed by police during a stop or arrest from presenting any evidence of the officers’ conduct leading up to the moment of violence, even if that earlier conduct was a violation of well-established constitutional law. This Court should reject the Petitioners’ reductionist, outcome-oriented approach, and affirm that Section 1983 Fourth Amendment claims are to be evaluated under the totality of the circumstances, using ordinary principles of proximate cause."

Brief of the National Police Accountability Project as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondents; Authored by Cynthia Heenan, Constitutional Litigation Associates, P.C.; Julia Yoo and Eugene Iredale, Iredale and Yoo, APC; Christopher Wimmer and Joshua Paulson, Emergent LLP; and Jeff Dominic Price.

Attachment: