Ross v. City of Jackson, No. 17-1390 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment to three officers based on qualified immunity on plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. 1983 claim, alleging the violation of his constitutional rights under the First and Fourth Amendments. The court held that the officers were justified in their efforts to investigate plaintiff's Facebook post asking in response to a post advocating against gun control measures: "Which one do I need to shoot up a kindergarten?" The court held that no exigent circumstances prevented the officers from gathering additional information before making the arrest. Here, a minimal further investigation would have revealed that plaintiff's post was not a true threat. Therefore, it was beyond debate that had the officers engaged in further investigation, the only reasonable conclusion was that plaintiff had not violated the law for disturbing the peace.
Court Description: Kelly, Author, with Loken and Gruender, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Civil rights. Plaintiff was arrested by defendants for peace disturbance after he made a Facebook post in response to a posting of pictures of guns in which he asked "Which one do I need to shoot up a kindergarten?" There were no exigent circumstances which would have prevented the defendant officers from gathering additional information before making the arrest, and even a minimal investigation would have revealed the post was not a true threat; the officers made the arrest without undertaking any investigation, other than to determine plaintiff's identity and likely location; after interviewing plaintiff, the officers indicated they did not believe the charges would stick, but arrested plaintiff anyway and held him in custody for several days; in sum, it is beyond debate that had the officers conducted even a minimal investigation they would have have determined plaintiff had not violated Mo. Rev. Stat. 574.115.1(3); the order granting defendants summary judgment based on qualified immunity is reversed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.