End qualified immunity in Massachusetts

Yes. The proposed legislation states for all MA public employees that, “It shall not be a defense or immunity to any action brought under this section that the defendant was acting in good faith, or that the defendant believed, reasonably or otherwise, that his or her conduct was lawful at the time when it was committed. Nor shall it be a defense or immunity that the rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the constitution or laws of the United States or the constitution or laws of the commonwealth were not clearly established at the time of their deprivation by the defendant, or that the state of the law was otherwise such that the defendant could not reasonably have been expected to know whether his or her conduct was lawful."

Yes. The proposed legislation states for all MA public employees that, “It shall not be a defense or immunity to any action brought under this section that the defendant was acting in good faith, or that the defendant believed, reasonably or otherwise, that his or her conduct was lawful at the time when it was committed. Nor shall it be a defense or immunity that the rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the constitution or laws of the United States or the constitution or laws of the commonwealth were not clearly established at the time of their deprivation by the defendant, or that the state of the law was otherwise such that the defendant could not reasonably have been expected to know whether his or her conduct was lawful."

Yes. The proposed legislation states, "Nor shall it be a defense or immunity that the rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the constitution or laws of the United States or the constitution or laws of the commonwealth were not clearly established at the time of their deprivation by the defendant, or that the state of the law was otherwise such that the defendant could not reasonably have been expected to know whether his or her conduct was lawful."

No. There are existing law caps damages for employer liability at $100,000 (Chapter 258, Section 2)

No. There is no mention of failure to intervene.

No. The proposed legislation removes existing indemnification for violation of state or federal constitutional rights and certain torts. In existing law, the government denies responsibility for payment under certain circumstances such as an employee acting in a malicious manner. The proposed bill would strike indemnification for law enforcement officers who for an act or a failure to act in a violation of civil rights, federal or state. “SECTION 4. Chapter 258, Section 8 of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting at the end “provided that such insurance shall not cover payment of damages incurred by an individual employee who has been found responsible for a civil rights violation.”

No. There is no mention of attorney fees.

No. There is no mention of employee accountability.

Yes. The bill is silent on public records disclosure, but current statutes allow for law enforcement misconduct records to be available to the Massachusetts Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission (POST) and to an officer’s current and future employers.