The Sacramento Bee today reports on an interesting ruling by Judge Shubb permitting a First Amendment right of association cause of action to proceed in a § 1983 action brought by the siblings of Joseph Mann, who was killed by Sacramento police last year:
The sisters and brothers of a man killed by Sacramento police won a pivotal federal court ruling this week that potentially expands who can legally sue in the aftermath of police shootings and opens a window on more information about the controversial incident.
Joseph Mann was shot 14 times in July of last year by two Sacramento police officers, John Tennis and Randy Lozoya.
Mann’s father previously sued the city and settled for $719,000.
But Mann’s five siblings were unhappy with the outcome of their father’s suit because they wanted it to include public tracking of police reforms in Sacramento and information on whether the two officers who fired shots had been disciplined by the department.
In June, they filed an unusual lawsuit using the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Most commonly known for protecting free speech, the First Amendment also protects the right of association – usually invoked for social or political groups.
In the Mann case, Sacramento lawyer Mark Merin argued that the killing deprived Joseph Mann’s sisters and brothers of the right to associate with him.
A judge said that legal angle raised “perplexing” questions, but was valid.
United States District Judge William B. Shubb ruled that nothing in the language of the Constitution or case law around the two amendments clearly excludes siblings from suing under the First Amendment, making it legal for the Mann siblings to make their claim.
Highlighting the ambiguity and gaps in current case law that lead to his decision, Shubb wrote, “It is sometimes said that tough cases make bad law. Here it might be more appropriately said that bad law makes tough cases.”