MONTGOMERY, Ala. — A bill expanding legal immunity for law enforcement officers was strengthened and passed in the Alabama House Thursday amid opposition from Democrats.
Sponsored by State Rep. Rex Reynolds, R-Hazel Green, House Bill 202 would make it harder to sue or prosecute members of law enforcement unless their conduct were overtly reckless or unconstitutional. The bill would establish higher legal standards to bring criminal charges or lawsuits against officers and facilitate the early dismissal of said charges should an officer be found to have been acting within their discretionary authority.
“In a criminal case (against an officer), we will pause that, allow for a hearing from a judge of that jurisdiction to determine if that officer acted within the scope of his duties,” Reynolds, a former Huntsville police chief, explained on the House floor. “It also outlines when he is reckless and operates outside the scope of his duties.”
A substitute to the bill was introduced that in many cases would narrow the circumstances under which an officer could be sued or prosecuted, as well as strengthen procedural protections for officers facing lawsuits or criminal charges.
For example, the updated bill raises the bar for lawsuits by requiring that an officer’s conduct be not only reckless, but constitute a specific violation of state law before an officer may face charges. It would also mandate that a court issue a determination of immunity within 45 days of a pre-trial hearing in cases against officers and afford an accused officer the ability to continue to claim immunity as a defense if the case moves to trial.
The bill now moves to the Senate. It is part of Gov. Kay Ivey’s “Safe Alabama“ package of public safety bills, her top priority this legislative session. The package has received near-total bi-partisan support from lawmakers, save for this bill, which House Democrats immediately opposed.
Democrats spoke in opposition of the bill on the House floor for hours.
“How much immunity do you need to be a cop?” asked Rep. Juandalynn Givan, D-Birmingham, noting that as an attorney, she had experienced a number of cases involving criminal charges against officers being dropped due to existing immunity.
Rep. Matt Simpson, R-Daphne, a prosecutor near Mobile, who said Reynold’s bill upheld the ability to prosecute officers that do “something that was wrong behind the badge.”
“This is not a get-out-of-jail-free card,” Simpson said. “This is something (where) as long as they stay within their constitutional constraints and they don’t violate the constitutional rights, then we stand for those officers that put their lives on the lines every day to stand for us.”
Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, said the bill lowered accountability for members of law enforcement to effectively “zero,” noting that over the past ten years, only three notable examples existed of officers being indicted on charges of murder or manslaughter.
England named the 2016 case of Montgomery Police Officer Aaron Smith killing 58-year-old Greg Gunn by firearm as he was fleeing, the 2018 case of Huntsville Police Officer William Darby shooting and killing 49-year-old Jeffrey Parker, who was threatening suicide, and the 2023 case of Decatur Police Officer Mac Marquette shooting and killing 39-year-old Steve Perkins at his home during a vehicle repossession.
“This bill is designed to make it harder to hold those officers who commit acts like that accountable,” England said.
England also pointed out that opposition to HB202 was not “about partisanship,” noting that the prosecutors in Huntsville and Decatur, the prosecutors who pursued charges against the aforementioned police officers, were Republicans, and the prosecutor in Montgomery, a Democrat.
Reynolds stood firm in his defense of HB202 amid the repeated claims that the bill would remove accountability for members of law enforcement, and argued that provisions remain in the bill to hold an officer criminally or civilly liable for overtly reckless or unconstitutional conduct. He also positioned that the enhanced legal protections would be an effective tool at recruiting and retaining officers, of which many of Alabama’s metro areas have faced continued shortages of.
“The recruitment and retention of our police officers in America is at an all time low; I can recall back in the 1970s when I was applying for the department, there were a thousand applications for 35 or 40 positions,” Reynolds said, who has 30 years of law enforcement himself. “Today, we’re looking to get 75 qualified applicants, and we may start an academy with 15 officers, and we’re seeing this throughout Alabama agencies.”
The substitute, along with the bill itself, ultimately passed in the House along party lines. In a show of support, the bill also amassed 56 cosponsors, and a round of applause from House Republicans upon its passage.
The partisan tension over the bill began early Thursday as Democrats objected to being denied the opportunity to speak on the proposed calendar of bills at the beginning of the day.
Ordinarily, House members deliberate on the chamber’s adoption of the proposed calendar of bills, the bills the chamber may take up any given day. House leadership, however, did not offer that opportunity Thursday, leading to a heated exchange between House Speaker Nathaniel Ledbetter, R-Rainsville, and Rep. Thomas Jackson, D-Thomasville.
“I’m not speaking on the bill Mr. Speaker,” Jackson said, instead speaking on he and his Democratic House colleagues’ inability to discuss the adoption of the calendar.
“You need to go sit down,” Ledbetter ordered as State House security positioned themselves at the entrance of the House chamber.
“Well, maybe I will, but I’m going to let them take me out of here today,” Jackson said. “I’m not just going to voluntarily sit down because you have used your authority and abused it this morning because you didn’t recognize me for a point of order.”
Tempers eventually cooled and Jackson remained in the chamber.
The Legislature is now adjourned for the first of two spring break weeks. Lawmakers will reconvene on March 17.