Recently, a few justices and legal scholars have recommended departing from the analysis set forth in Saucier v. Katz, referred to as the "rigid order of battle," to determine a police officer's entitlement to qualified immunity.2 Such a departure would be ill advised from the perspective of professional police officers, who are trained on constitutional law. The rigid order of battle promotes the development of clear guidelines as to what conduct is and, perhaps more importantly, is not constitutional.3 Such clear guidelines are then imparted to police officers through training, and such training ultimately results in the protection of the public's constitutional rights.
展开▼
