ARLINGTON, Va.—Today, the Institute for Justice (IJ) announced it has filed amicus briefs in two different civil rights cases out of Louisiana—Brown v. Pouncy and Monroe v. Conner—asking the United States Supreme Court to make clear that the state’s use of a short statute of limitations in civil rights cases is out of step with federal law. 

“Louisiana has essentially made it impossible for victims of government abuse to bring constitutional claims against their abusers, by making the window for bringing these claims so narrow,” said IJ Attorney Katrin Marquez. “It often takes months just to develop a case and establish the basic facts, and this has only been made worse by the creation of procedural barriers, such as qualified immunity, which requires even more work prior to filing a lawsuit.” 

Both Brown v. Pouncy and Monroe v. Conner are cases where police physically abused a person accused of a non-violent offense. In both cases, the victim brought suit within two years, which is a typical statute of limitations period. However, both cases were dismissed at the district court level and the appeals court upheld both dismissals, because at that time, Louisiana was one of just four jurisdictions with a statute of limitations of one-year for claims brought under Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act. In June of this year, lawmakers in Louisiana extended that timeframe to two years. These short statutes of limitations don’t just harm victims who are looking to bring claims over police brutality; they prevent justice for a broad variety of legal claims. 

Jarius Brown was taken into custody for non-violent traffic offenses. While in custody, he was attacked without provocation by police officers from the DeSoto Parish Sheriff’s Office. The attack left Brown hospitalized with a fractured nose and eye socket, and abrasions to his face. He filed his lawsuit two years after the event.  

Anthony Monroe was physically attacked by three Louisiana State Police Troops during a routine traffic stop in Bossier Parish. The beating was so severe that Monroe suffered a heart attack and other life-threatening injuries. He filed his lawsuit one year and 11 months after the incident. 

While the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court’s dismissal in both these cases, it did so because it felt only the Supreme Court could address this issue. Judge James Ho even noted that precedent on this issue makes little sense, saying at oral argument “you would think the last thing Congress would want is fifty different limitations rules.” He even encouraged Brown to seek review of his case from the United States Supreme Court.  

“Louisiana’s use of incredibly short statutes of limitations in cases brought under Section 1983 goes against the statute’s purpose of creating a meaningful way to remedy violations of individuals’ constitutional rights by abusive government officials,” said IJ Senior Attorney Anya Bidwell. “Without a reasonable statute of limitations that allows victims to properly prepare for a lawsuit by, for example, fleshing out their legal claims, the remedies created by Section 1983 are rendered useless.”