•  
  •  
 

Publication Date

5-7-2026

Document Type

Casenote

Abstract

The Framers designed America’s legal system with the belief that no one, not even the government, is above the law. The right to hold government officials accountable before a court reflects the Framers’ vision that justice resides in the people themselves. Unfortunately, countless citizens who suffer excessive force are barred from presenting their stories to the jury. Nowhere is the clash between liberty and authority more visible than in encounters between police and citizens. Every day, those who wear the badge are forced to make difficult judgment calls in volatile situations.

In 2024, 147 officers lost their lives in the line of duty. Each death is a stark reminder that maintaining public safety comes at a cost. These officers were not faceless enforcers of the law; they were fathers, mothers, sons, and daughters who gave their lives in service to their communities. Police officers are not the only ones who face harm. In that same year, 1,365 people lost their lives during an encounter with law enforcement. Each of those individuals was someone the officer had sworn to protect. Their deaths underscore the deadly stakes of modern policing.

To reduce these tragedies, the Supreme Court of the United States defined the boundaries the Constitution places on police conduct. Excessive-force jurisprudence evaluates police uses of force under the Fourth Amendment’s objective-reasonableness standard. Despite dozens of opinions from the Court, one question has divided the lower courts: how much context is enough? Some courts believed the answer was just the very moment the officer deployed force, while others looked more broadly into the encounter. In an effort to clarify, the Supreme Court held that courts must analyze the totality of the circumstances of the encounters. By doing this, the Court changed the way that claims of excessive force will be examined for many years to come.

Download

Share

COinS