Rivas-Villegas v. Cortesluna

In 2016, Union City police officers responded to a domestic violence call involving Ramon Cortesluna, who was reported to be threatening his girlfriend and her children with a chainsaw. Officers encountered Cortesluna outside his home with a knife. After commands, Cortesluna dropped the knife and lay prone, but Officer Daniel Rivas-Villegas fired two less-lethal beanbag rounds from a shotgun, one striking his back while another officer moved to handcuff him. Cortesluna survived and sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit denied qualified immunity, finding disputed facts about whether Cortesluna posed an immediate threat. The Supreme Court granted certiorari and, in a per curiam decision on October 18, 2021, reversed. The Court held that even assuming a constitutional violation, no clearly established law put the officer on notice that firing beanbag rounds under those circumstances was unlawful.

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and held that Officer Rivas-Villegas was entitled to qualified immunity because no clearly established law prohibited his use of force, without deciding whether the force was actually unconstitutional.

Whether Officer Rivas-Villegas was entitled to qualified immunity from Cortesluna's Fourth Amendment excessive-force claim, and whether existing precedent clearly established that firing less-lethal beanbag rounds at a suspect who had just dropped a knife and was on the ground violated the Constitution.

The decision reinforced the Supreme Court's trend of granting qualified immunity to police officers in close excessive-force cases and signaled lower courts to avoid high-level generalizations of precedent. It drew criticism from civil rights advocates who argue qualified immunity shields police misconduct, while law enforcement groups welcomed it as protecting officers from uncertain legal standards.