Sotomayor dissents over police force on Vermont protester

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented in a case involving a Vermont state police sergeant's use of force against a nonviolent protester, warning that the majority granted officers a 'license to inflict gratuitous pain.' The decision reversed a lower court's ruling denying qualified immunity to Sgt. Jacob Zorn. Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, argued the action violated the Fourth Amendment.

On March 23, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a per curiam decision reversing the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Shela Linton, a protester arrested during a 2015 sit-in at Vermont's capitol advocating for universal healthcare. Linton, co-founder of the Root Social Justice Center, had locked arms with fellow activists inside the legislative chamber after hours, leading to her arrest for trespassing by Vermont State Police Sgt. Jacob Zorn. Zorn applied a 'rear wristlock' for 'pain compliance,' which Linton alleged caused permanent damage to her left wrist and shoulder, as well as PTSD, depression, and anxiety. She further claimed Zorn targeted her 'because I am black' and whispered that 'she should have called her legislator' while applying pressure and lifting her upward. The 2nd Circuit had denied Zorn qualified immunity, finding that his actions could violate Linton's clearly established Fourth Amendment rights against excessive force. However, the Supreme Court majority ruled that no prior 2nd Circuit precedent clearly established such a violation in similar circumstances, granting Zorn immunity. In her dissent, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sotomayor criticized the decision as 'plainly inconsistent' with the Fourth Amendment, which limits force to what is 'necessary' under the circumstances. She wrote, 'The majority today gives officers license to inflict gratuitous pain on a nonviolent protestor even where there is no threat to officer safety or any other reason to do so.' Sotomayor, a former 2nd Circuit judge, argued that existing precedent should have put Zorn on notice against using such force on a peaceful demonstrator.

ተያያዥ ጽሁፎች

Dramatic illustration of Justice Sotomayor dissenting outside the Supreme Court, overlaid with the wrongful arrest of journalist Priscilla Villarreal, underscoring First Amendment concerns.
በ AI የተሰራ ምስል

Sotomayor dissents as Supreme Court declines to hear Texas journalist’s wrongful-arrest appeal

በAI የተዘገበ በ AI የተሰራ ምስል እውነት ተፈትሸ

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal by Texas citizen journalist Priscilla Villarreal, leaving in place a divided ruling that she cannot sue local officials over her 2017 arrest for obtaining nonpublic information from police. Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a lone dissent, calling the arrest an obvious First Amendment violation.

The U.S. Supreme Court on April 20, 2026, granted a petition from Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department officers and sent the death case of Roy Anthony Scott back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to reconsider in light of the court’s March 23 decision in Zorn v. Linton.

በAI የተዘገበ

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a sharp dissent on Monday as the court declined to hear the case of James Skinner, serving life without parole for the 1998 killing of teenager Eric Walber in Louisiana. Joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sotomayor accused the court of failing to enforce its own precedents on withheld evidence. She highlighted the unequal treatment compared to Skinner's co-defendant Michael Wearry, who was released after similar Brady violations.

Rosie Speedlin-Gonzalez, a Bexar County judge, has resigned her position following a voluntary agreement with the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct. The deal forever disqualifies her from serving as a judge in Texas amid multiple misconduct complaints, including a December 2024 incident where she ordered an attorney handcuffed in her courtroom. Her criminal case remains active.

በAI የተዘገበ

The US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Tuesday in Hencely v. Fluor Corporation, permitting a former soldier wounded in a suicide bombing to sue the defense contractor under state law. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion, joined by Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch and the three liberal justices. The decision rejected arguments for federal preemption of such claims.

ይህ ድረ-ገጽ ኩኪዎችን ይጠቀማል

የእኛን ጣቢያ ለማሻሻል ለትንታኔ ኩኪዎችን እንጠቀማለን። የእኛን የሚስጥር ፖሊሲ አንብቡ የሚስጥር ፖሊሲ ለተጨማሪ መረጃ።
ውድቅ አድርግ