ST. PAUL, Minn.—Yesterday, a three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of Hamdi Mohamud’s civil rights lawsuit against St. Paul Police Officer Heather Weyker, who framed Mohamud in 2011. Because Weyker was working on a state-federal task force and cross-deputized as a federal officer at the time, the court held that Weyker cannot be held accountable for fabricating evidence that put then-teenaged Mohamud behind bars for nearly two years. The Institute for Justice (IJ), which represents Mohamud, will petition the entire Eighth Circuit for en banc review so that all active judges may reconsider the panel’s decision.

“Today’s decision is deeply disappointing,” said Patrick Jaicomo, senior attorney at the Institute for Justice. “Despite clear evidence that Officer Weyker lied to frame Hamdi, the courts continue to grant her immunity. No constitutional right is safe if judges invent or maintain loopholes for officers who flout the law.”

At the heart of Mohamud v. Weyker is a growing accountability gap created when local police officers join work cooperatively with federal officers on task forces. Ordinarily, a federal law known as “Section 1983” allows victims to sue state and local officers who violate the Constitution. But when those officers work alongside federal colleagues, courts tend to bless them with sweeping immunities that leave their victims with no legal remedy. This long-running is a case in point.

In 2019, the Eighth Circuit first held that Officer Weyker could not hide behind qualified immunity because “a reasonable officer would know that deliberately misleading another officer into arresting an innocent individual to protect a sham investigation is unlawful.” In 2020, the Court then held that Weyker could not be sued as a federal officer but that did “not mean the plaintiff[’s case is] over.” If Mohamud could show that Weyker was acting as a state officer, Mohamud could proceed.

So the Institute for Justice dug in and uncovered extensive documentation showing that Weyker was working as a state officer—on a St. Paul led task-force with its mission to benefit Minnesota. Still, in yesterday’s decision, the Eighth Circuit seemingly disregarded that new evidence and held that “state law had nothing to do with” Weyker’s actions.

Today’s decision allows Officer Weyker to escape scot-free for framing an innocent teenager. But IJ will continue the legal battle by appealing this case to the full Eighth Circuit and, if necessary, Supreme Court. The continuing growth of de facto “taskforce immunity” is becoming increasingly important as state and federal officers continue to support one another in law-enforcement roles. And, above all, Hamdi Mohamud deserves her long-overdue day in court and an opportunity to hold accountable the police officer who violated her constitutional rights.