Tasers in the Library


If you don't read the national blogs you may not have seen the videos of, or heard about, the recent incident at UCLA. The campus police repeatedly tasered a student who refused to leave the library fast enough after refusing to show identification.

You can view the video here.

Today, Americablog reports that the use of the tasers may have been consistent with official policy, which apparently allows for the use of "pain compliance techniques" against a "passive or actively resisting individual...when the officer reasonably believes that the use of such a technique appears necessary to further a legitimate law enforcement purpose".

John Aravosis thinks one of the higher ups should be fired. I don't know about that, but I'm reasonably certain that one or more of them is going to get sued, along with the University itself. I'm a bit rusty on this, but my recollection is that a governmental entity is liable for civil rights violations that result from implementation of official policy. Ah, here it is, in Monell v. Department of Social Services, in which a rational Supreme Court from the days of yore reversed the anomalous Monroe v. Pape:

Our analysis of the legislative history of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 compels the conclusion that Congress did intend municipalities and other local government units to be included among those persons to whom 1983 applies. 54 Local governing bodies, 55 therefore, can be sued directly under 1983 for monetary, declaratory, or injunctive relief where, as here, the action that is alleged to be unconstitutional implements or executes a policy statement, ordinance, regulation, or decision officially adopted and promulgated by that body's officers.

If the use of potentially deadly force is constitutionally permitted in order to encourage a non-violent individual to leave a library then we are in a heap of trouble. We can only hope and pray that it is the University of California that's in that heap. The only way for the University to defend itself would be to take the position that tasering non-resisting people is okay, or to claim that it is not liable because the officer could not have "reasonably believe[d] that the use of such a technique appears necessary to further a legitimate law enforcement purpose." Since getting the fellow out of the library was legitimate (after all, he didn't show his ID!!!) they would have to argue that the officer wasn't being reasonable. In other words, they have to throw the cop under the bus. (Or, get lucky and draw a right wing judge that thinks tasering is too good for Arab looking students who won't show their IDs).

The taseree is not the only potential plaintiff. A number of student on-lookers were appalled, and asked the officers for their names and badge numbers. At least one student was told to be quiet or he would be tasered too. The ACLU says that constitutes an assault. The University is off the hook on that one, unless it has a policy condoning the threat of force against people who are doing absolutely nothing wrong.
Posted: Monday - November 20, 2006 at 10:26 PM          

©