“Confirmed Judges, Confirmed Fears” is a blog series documenting the harmful impact of President Trump’s judges on Americans’ rights and liberties. It includes judges nominated in both his first and second terms.
What’s at stake in this case
Derrick Harris sued a police officer for fabricating evidence against him. The officer claimed qualified immunity and wanted the case dismissed.
What happened in this case?
Derrick Harris filed a civil rights lawsuit against police officer Sharon Kim, contending that Kim had improperly fabricated evidence against him in a prosecution relating to illegal gang activity. The case was in Los Angeles before district court judge Wesley Hsu, who was nominated by President Biden.
Kim filed a motion for summary judgment, claiming qualified immunity. Hsu found that there were material facts at Issue and denied the motion, so that Harris could proceed with his case. Kim appealed to the Ninth Circuit The case was considered by a panel including Trump nominee Kenneth Lee.
What did Trump judge Lee and the Ninth Circuit majority decide?
Trump judge Lee and George W Bush nominee Sandra Ikuta issued an unsigned 2-1 decision that reversed the ruling below, holding that Kim should have received qualified immunity and summary judgment against Harris. The November 2025 ruling is at Harris v Kim.
What did Judge Clifton say in dissent?
Judge Richard Clifton, who was nominated by President George W Bush, dissented. He explained that the majority had improperly ruled, in essence, that there were no factual issues genuinely in dispute, even though the case law establishes that an appellate court does not have jurisdiction in a qualified immunity case that seeks to “re-weigh” the determination as to the facts in the case. Harris should have been permitted, according to Clifton, to continue with his case in light of the disputed factual issues, and Kim should not have prevailed at this point in the case.
Why is the result harmful?
The ruling made possible by Trump judge Lee will obviously harm Derrick Harris’ effort to get justice for the police misconduct he alleges, and may make it harder for victims to get justice in similar cases. In addition, the decision illustrates the importance of our federal courts to health, welfare and justice and the significance of having fair-minded judges on the federal bench.