Government shouldn’t be immune either. They are the people and work for the people. In a sane world. Present did a shitty job? Electric chair. No fucking immunity anywhere.
this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2026
262 points (99.6% liked)
News
36142 readers
4886 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Colorado already has limited qualified immunity
Under Colorado Senate Bill 20-217, qualified immunity is not a defense to the civil action, and officers may be liable for up to $25,000 for knowingly unlawful actions. If the peace officer's employer determines the officer did not act upon a good faith and reasonable belief that the action was lawful, then the peace officer is personally liable for 5 percent of the judgment (up to $25,000). A public entity does not have to indemnify a peace officer if the peace officer was convicted of a criminal violation for the conduct from which the claim arises.
The Federal Government made QI illegal in 1881. Some unnamed secretary illegally changed the wording of the law in 1884 and it wasn't noticed until recently.
Wait, what?! Have there been rulings on this since then? This seems huge.
Although, from the article it doesn't sound like it would have relevance to federal immunity.
You seem to be correct. It's been a couple years, and I forgot it only applies to state level immunities. As far as I can tell SCOTUS would have to overturn Harlow v Fitzgerald.
That's a protection against suing specific people, not against suing the government.
You can sue the police department, but if there's qualified immunity you can't sue the cop.
Sovereign Immunity means that the federal government has to give you permission before you can sue them.
Present president included!
Nah he’s not worth the electrical bill now that I think of it. Push him off a cliff and hope no stones get hurt.
Scum... "We deserve all the benefits of a private company, but we also deserve all the protections of a government entity."
Fuck you GEO group...
Dont forget about the whole slavery part.
I'm inclined to say slavery is covered by both private companies (outsourcing forced labour to 'less naggy' countries) as well as government entities (with that super convenient exception clause to the 13th amendment)
Slavery is explicitly illegal in all cases in Colorado
detainees at the Aurora Immigration Processing Center in Colorado.
Were they actually convicted of a crime at the time their labor was coerced? Serious question.
Thirteenth Amendment, Section 1:
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Glad this only took 12 goddamn years to resolve...
How the fuck are for profit prisons a thing!?!? How the fuck does someone own and operate one of these things and sleep at night?
On a pile of money, dear boy.
You already know the answers to both of those questions.
The secret ingredient is corruption.
And sociopathy.
It's literally in the constitution bro
"denying them a fast-track appeal of a lower court ruling" that does not sound like strike down.
Geez, after 12 years the lawsuit can finally move forward.
Hey it only took 12 years!
"Derivative sovereign immunity" my ass. I am paid through NIH grants, does that give me sovereign immunity? No.
Selfish people being selfish.
How did this even get to SCOTUS?
They wanted to clarify whether GEO can appeal directly to the Circuit before a judgement has been rendered by the lower courts. SCOTUS said no, lower courts have to issue a final judgement before higher courts have jurisdiction.
We granted certiorari, 605 U. S. 968 (2025), to resolve whether a pretrial order denying Yearsley protection to a government contractor is immediately appealable. Like the Tenth Circuit, we hold that it is not. But unlike the Tenth Circuit, we focus on the third Cohen condition, which re- quires an order to be effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment.
Decision here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-758_2dp3.pdf
Hmm thanks, but still wonder why SCOTUS took the case in the first place. Also wonder whether the ruling will apply to Trump since ICE etc. have been ignoring orders from lower courts while appeals are in progress.
According to the cert grant it's a pretty well established circuit split:
The Tenth Circuit’s decision is the latest addi- tion to a deep division in the circuit courts as to whether a denial of derivative sovereign immunity is an appealable collateral order. The Second, Sixth, and Eleventh Circuits hold that it is; the Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, Ninth, and now Tenth Cir- cuits hold that it is not.
It only takes 4 justices for the court to grant cert on a case, so it's possible most of the court would prefer not to hear the case at all and leave the circuits split. I can't find which justices voted to grant, I'm not even sure if it's public information.
Writ of certiorari: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-758/337176/20250113154843375_No.%2024-______%20Petition.pdf
EDIT: as to it's impact on ICE: It's overturning precedent in a few Circuits regarding so-called "derivative soveriegn immunity" for contractors who work with government agencies, so it will probably have impacts for ICE in some parts of the country. I think it mostly means that more cases will have to churn through the lower courts before higher courts can review them, which may mean more splashy "ICE dunked on by liberal judge" headlines. I think it also means that higher courts will have to review the cases on the merits, rather than just dismissing them as unreviewable due to DSI. How many cases that applies to and what the actual implications are, IDK IANAL.
Ah thanks, I had no idea that there was a circuit split or that "derivative sovereign immunity" wasn't something pulled out of the company's butt just for the case at hand.
No sweat, I just learned that myself because of your question.