In Buffalo, New York, a frustrated man’s profanity-laced rebuke of a police officer led to a questionable detainment, which has now resulted in a legal battle over free speech and accountability among law enforcement. An appeals court recently ruled that the officer involved is not entitled to qualified immunity, which means that the lawsuit against the officers involved may proceed.
The incident occurred on a 2016 evening after R. Anthony Rupp, an attorney, yelled at Officer Todd McAlister, who was “rapidly approaching” a crosswalk without his headlights turned on. The attorney and his wife were exiting Chef’s Restaurant and were crossing the street to the parking lot, according to a legal filing.
As Rupp and his wife began walking across the street and reached the midway point of the street crossing, Rupp observed a large vehicle approaching at rapid speed down Seneca Street from the East. The vehicle was dark in color and had no headlights or running lights illuminating it in the dark…The fast-moving, dark vehicle, ended being a black-and-white SUV without any headlights on and without any emergency lights activated.
The couple quickly moved across the street to avoid the vehicle. The filing notes that “seconds later, two female patrons of Chef’s Restaurant walked out of the parking lot across from the restaurant and attempted to cross Seneca Street to go to Chef’s.”
It appeared to Rupp that these women were in danger of being hit by the vehicle, which was being driven by Officer McAlister, who “was able to apply his brakes and come to an abrupt stop only a few feet away from hitting and killing the two female patrons.”
At this point, Rupp lashed out in frustration, shouting: “Turn your lights on, a**hole!”
The officer then pulled into the parking lot to confront Rupp, stating that the attorney “could be arrested” for having shouted at him. The attorney responded by saying that the officer “should not be driving down a city street after dark without headlights on.”
The officer “became immediately agitated and visibly angry in response” and told Rupp he was being detained. McAlister told Rupp that he was driving without the lights on because he was taking it to be serviced, and the headlights “were not operational.”
Other officers arrived on the scene, one of whom gave Rupp a summons for violating a noise ordinance.
At the heart of Rupp’s lawsuit against the City of Buffalo and Officer McAlister is a question of constitutional rights: Can a verbal critique of a police officer be grounds for punishment?
The district court initially ruled in favor of the police, granting them qualified immunity and dismissing Rupp’s lawsuit. However, an appeals court recently overturned this ruling, noting that Rupp’s outburst was protected by the First Amendment.
This case raises concerns not only about officers abusing their authority but also the lack of accountability when they do so. If the first court’s ruling had stood, the officers involved would have been protected by qualified immunity, a legal doctrine that shields members of law enforcement from civil liability in many cases.
It is not clear how Rupp’s lawsuit will turn out, but even if he is successful, McAlister will likely not face any civil consequences personally. Even in cases in which qualified immunity is denied, officers are typically indemnified, meaning that it is the police department or local government that will be on the hook for paying the settlement.
This case is one of several that highlight the tension between enabling law enforcement to protect our rights and holding them accountable when they violate said rights.
