Megan Green v. Cliff Sommer - Civil Rights Case Ruling

8th Circuit Court of Appeals

Filed November 1st, 2022

Detected March 2nd, 2026

Summary

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on the civil rights case Megan Green v. Cliff Sommer. The court partially affirmed the denial of qualified immunity for some officers involved in a tear gas incident during protests, while granting it for others and dismissing conspiracy claims.

View original document View source feed page

What changed

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling in the civil rights case Megan Green v. Cliff Sommer (Case No. 22-1288). The court affirmed the district court's denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity for four St. Louis police officers who allegedly fired tear gas at the plaintiff during protests. The court found that the plaintiff plausibly alleged the tear-gassing was in retaliation for First Amendment activities. However, the court reversed the denial of qualified immunity for eight other officers, finding the complaint did not sufficiently allege their personal involvement. The court also dismissed the plaintiff's conspiracy claims, noting it was not clearly established at the time that officers could conspire to violate First Amendment rights.

This ruling has implications for law enforcement's use of force during protests and the application of qualified immunity. While some officers may still face civil rights claims, others have been shielded by qualified immunity. The dismissal of conspiracy claims highlights the specific pleading requirements for such allegations. Regulated entities, particularly law enforcement agencies, should review their policies and training regarding crowd control and the protection of First Amendment rights in light of this decision. The ruling also underscores the importance of clearly alleging personal involvement in alleged constitutional violations when bringing suit against government officials.

What to do next

Review internal policies and training regarding use of force during protests.
Ensure clear documentation of officer involvement in alleged constitutional violations.
Consult legal counsel on the implications of qualified immunity and conspiracy claims in civil rights litigation.

Source document (simplified)

[PUBLISHED] [Melloy, Author, with Gruender and Erickson, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Civil rights. In action alleging St. Louis police officers violated plaintiff's civil rights when they fired tear gas in her direction during the protests surrounding the acquittal of St. Louis police officer Jason Stockley, the district court did not err in denying the motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity filed by four officers who allegedly tear-gassed plaintiff from an armored vehicle, as plaintiff's allegation that she was not committing any crime when she was tear-gassed was enough to plausibly allege the tear-gassing was in retaliation for her First Amendment activities; the district court erred in denying eight other officers' motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity as the complaint did not plausibly allege they were personally involved in the alleged violation of clearly established constitutional rights; with respect to plaintiff's conspiracy claims, it was not clearly established at the time of the incident that officers could conspire with one another to violate a First Amendment right, and the district court erred by not dismissing this claim; the district court did not err in denying defendants official immunity on plaintiff's state law claims.

File:

221288P.pdf Date: Tuesday, November 1, 2022 Case Number: 22-1288 District Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis Author: Judge Michael J. Melloy