The tragic case of Messiah Nantwi highlights pressing concerns surrounding qualified immunity and the treatment of incarcerated individuals in the United States.
Born and raised in the Bronx, Nantwi recently became the seventh incarcerated New Yorker to die in custody since February 2025. While the specifics surrounding his death remain unclear, it is evident that neglect and indifference from correction officers played a critical role in this heartbreaking outcome.
Experts argue that without the existing legal protections for law enforcement officers—particularly qualified immunity—Nantwi might still be alive today. This doctrine, established in 1967 by the Warren Court, was intended to shield police officers from personal liability during their duties when acting in “good faith.” However, critics assert that qualified immunity has since been distorted, undermining the fundamental civil rights protections that emerged from the Reconstruction Era.
Legal experts point to the significance of the federal civil rights statute, 42 US § 1983, enacted in 1871 to safeguard African Americans from pervasive threats posed by the Ku Klux Klan and similar groups. District Judge Reeves captured this sentiment in his opinion following the case Green v. Thomas (2024), noting that the judicial system has inverted the original purpose of this law, which was designed to protect the very individuals whose rights are still violated by those in positions of authority.
Historically, courts have interpreted the parameters of reasonable force, often siding with law enforcement. The doctrine of qualified immunity allows officers to evade accountability unless it is demonstrated that they violated a “clearly established” right—a stipulation that has proven incredibly challenging for plaintiffs to meet.
The growing movement for reform has been evident in states like Colorado, Montana, Nevada, and New Mexico, who have eradicated qualified immunity from their legal frameworks. Advocates are now urging New York to follow suit and reconsider its stance on this contentious issue.
Legal scholars argue that crucial Supreme Court decisions, like Harlow (1982), have essentially granted officers limitless protections, creating a paradox where plaintiffs struggle to establish a clear right unless such a right has already been sufficiently defined in prior cases. Similarly, the Graham ruling (1989) reinforces a flawed notion of a “reasonable officer,” which can often shield misconduct.
Opponents of reform raise concerns that eliminating qualified immunity might deter officers from engaging in law enforcement duties, while recent research from UCLA law Professor Joanna Schwartz suggests that fear may be unfounded. Schwartz’s findings indicate that nearly all financial recoveries related to civil rights violations are borne by government entities, not individual officers.
Advocates for justice emphasize the need to uphold human dignity and safety for all individuals, including those in custody. Stan German from the New York County Defender Services remarked that while Nantwi was incarcerated, he remained entitled to fundamental rights, akin to everyone else.
As discussions around qualified immunity intensify, it is clear that the legal framework must be reevaluated. Whether through the judiciary or legislative action, the voices calling for reform grow louder.
In the end, Messiah Nantwi’s tragic fate serves as a poignant reminder of the urgent necessity for legal reform. It not only honors his memory but also advocates for a system that ensures justice and dignity for all, including Robert Brooks and countless others who deserve better treatment and protections under the law.
image source from：https://amsterdamnews.com/news/2025/06/05/op-ed-its-time-to-abolish-qualified-immunity-in-new-york/
