“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
A prison guard was sued for deliberate indifference for remotely unlocking cell of prisoner on suicide watch
What happened in this case?
Deputy Monica Everett was remotely monitoring Rachael Gantt, who was a pretrial detainee in an Alabama county jail. Although Gantt was considered a suicide risk, Everett remotely unlocked her cell so she could be taken for some medical treatment. In fact, after the cell was unlocked, Gantt immediately ran up to the second floor and jumped, suffering serious injury.
Everett was sued for deliberate indifference, and claimed qualified immunity amd sought summary judgment. The District court denied the motion and Everett appealed. George W Bush Judge William Pryor, Trump Judge Barbara Lagoa, and Biden Judge Embry Kidd reversed the district court 2-1 in December 2025 in Gantt v Everett.
What did Trump judge Lagoa and Bush judge Pryor decide?
Judges Pryor and Lagoa issued a 2-1 ruling directing the lower court to grant qualified immunity to Everett to protect her from the claims against her. According to the majority, it was not established that Everett was “actually, subjectively aware” that her decision to remotely unlock the cell “caused a substantial risk of serious harm” based on Gantt’s “suicidal tendencies.”
What did Judge Kidd say in dissent?
Judge Kidd firmly dissented. Contrary to the majority, he wrote that there was evidence in the record from which a “reasonable jury could find” that when Everett remotely unlocked the cell door, she was “subjectively aware that doing so created a substantial risk” that Gantt would climb the stairs and jump. Prior precedent made clear, he went on, that Everett could have avoided liability if she “responded reasonably” to the situation, such as by ensuring that another deputy was in the area before remotely unlocking the door. Evett’s failure to do so, Kidd suggested, made it improper to find in her favor as a matter of law.
Why is the result harmful?
Trump judge Lagoa’s deciding vote obviously made it impossible to hold Deputy Everett responsible for the deliberate indifference that led to the injury to Gantt. It also sets a bad precedent in cases concerning deliberate indifference in the Eleventh Circuit, including Alabama, Georgia, and Florida, and illustrates the importance of our federal courts to health, welfare and justice and the significance of having fair-minded judges on the federal bench.