119-hr3602

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3602 Introduced in House

    (IH) ]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
 1st Session
 H. R. 3602

 To amend the Revised Statutes to remove the defense of qualified 
 immunity in the case of any action under 

section 1979, and for other 
 purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 May 23, 2025

 Ms. Pressley (for herself, Mrs. Beatty, Mr. Carson, Mr. Frost, Ms. 
 Jayapal, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Ms. Kelly of Illinois, Ms. Lee of 
Pennsylvania, Ms. Norton, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, Ms. Pingree, Mrs. Ramirez, 
Ms. Schakowsky, Ms. Tlaib, and Ms. Williams of Georgia) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

 A BILL

 To amend the Revised Statutes to remove the defense of qualified 
 immunity in the case of any action under 

section 1979, and for other 
 purposes.

 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

 This Act may be cited as the ``Ending Qualified Immunity Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

 Congress finds the following:

    (1) Congress passed the Act of April 20, 1871 (commonly 
 known as the ``Ku Klux Klan Act''; 17 Stat. 13, chapter 22) to 
 enforce the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United 
 States and combat rampant violations of civil and 
 constitutionally secured rights across the United States, 
 particularly those of newly freed slaves and other Black people 
 in the post-Civil War South.

    (2) Included in that Act was a provision, now codified at 
 

section 1979 of the Revised Statues (in this section referred 
 to as ``

section 1983''), which provides a cause of action for 
 individuals to file lawsuits against persons acting under color 
 of law, including State and local officials, who violate their 
 Federal legal and constitutionally secured rights.

    (3) Under 

section 1983 a person may be held liable for 
 acting under color of State law, even if they are not acting in 
 accordance with State law.

    (4) Section 1983 has never included a defense or immunity 
 for government officials who act in good faith when violating 
 rights, nor has it ever had a defense or immunity based on 
 whether the right was ``clearly established'' at the time of 
 the violation.

    (5) From 1871 through the 1960s, government actors were not 
 afforded qualified immunity for violating rights.

    (6) The Supreme Court of the United States in Pierson v. 
 Ray, 386 U.S. 547

    (1967) , found that government actors had a 
 good-faith defense for making arrests under unconstitutional 
 statutes based on a common-law defense for the tort of false 
 arrest.

    (7) The Supreme Court of the United States later extended 
 the good-faith defense beyond false arrests, turning it into a 
 general good-faith defense for government officials.

    (8) Finally, in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800

    (1982) , 
 the Supreme Court of the United States found the subjective 
 search for good faith in the government actor unnecessary, and 
 replaced it with an ``objective reasonableness'' standard that 
 requires that the right be ``clearly established'' at the time 
 of the violation for the defendant to be liable.

    (9) The doctrine of qualified immunity has severely limited 
 the ability of many plaintiffs to recover damages under 

section 1983 when their rights have been violated by State and local 
 officials.

    (10) As a result, the intent of Congress in passing 

section 1983 has been frustrated, and the rights secured by the 
 Constitution of the United States have not been appropriately 
 protected.

SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

 It is the sense of Congress that Congress must correct the 
erroneous interpretation of 

section 1979 of the Revised Statutes that 
provides for qualified immunity and reiterate the standard found on the 
face of the statute, which does not limit liability on the basis of the 
good-faith belief of the defendant or on the basis that the right was 
not ``clearly established'' at the time of the violation.

SEC. 4. REMOVAL OF QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.

 

Section 1979 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1983) is amended--

    (1) by inserting ``

    (a) '' before ``Every person''; and

    (2) by adding at the end the following:
 ``

    (b) It shall not be a defense to any action pending on, or filed 
after, the date of enactment of this subsection that, at the time of 
the deprivation--
 ``

    (1) the defendant was acting in good faith;
 ``

    (2) the defendant believed, reasonably or otherwise, that 
 his or her conduct was lawful;
 ``

    (3) the rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the 
 Constitution and laws were not clearly established; or
 ``

    (4) the state of the law was such that the defendant 
 could not reasonably have been expected to know whether his or 
 her conduct was lawful.''.
 <all>