Today, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari filed by the Institute for Justice (IJ) on behalf of Hamdi Mohamud. The petition asked the High Court to address whether and how so-called task-force officers who violate the Constitution can be held accountable. These officers, like St. Paul Police Officer Heather Weyker, carry power under both state and federal law. But by denying Mohamud’s petition, the Court leaves this question unanswered and allows Weyker to walk away scot-free after her lies sent Mohamud—then a teenager—to federal jail for about two years. 

“This case is remarkable because Officer Weyker’s actions were so egregious that even qualified immunity did not shield her,” said Patrick Jaicomo, senior attorney at the Institute for Justice. “But the Eighth Circuit’s invocation of other protections normally reserved for federal officers spared her from accountability anyhow. The Supreme Court’s refusal to engage with task force immunity today means that Officer Weyker will face zero consequences for violating the Constitution and her victim—Hamdi Mohamud—is left to bear the cost of her abuse.”

Mohamud’s case arises from a disturbing accountability gap that appears when local police officers join federal task forces. Under federal law, victims can generally sue state and local officers who violate the Constitution. But federal officers are effectively immune from these types of claims. When the two work together, on so-called task forces, courts have increasingly treated federal agents and granted them what amounts to absolute task-force immunity.

The underlying events date back to 2011, when Officer Weyker, who was working on a St. Paul, Minnesota, led human-trafficking task force, fabricated claims against Mohamud and her friends to protect a witness who had attacked the girls with a knife. Weyker’s false claims led to Mohamud’s arrest, prosecution, and nearly two years in federal detention before the government ultimately dropped the charges and Weyker’s larger trafficking investigation fell apart after courts caught Weyker lying repeatedly and determined that her case may be “fictitious.”

In all, more than 30 people had their lives upended because of Weyker’s dishonesty. None was convicted of a crime, but with the Supreme Court’s decision today, none of the more-than-two-dozen lawsuits against Weyker resulted in accountability. Despite her flagrant disregard of the Constitution, Weyker will face no legal accountability. Today’s decision is another injustice for Hamdi Mohamud, but her case stands as a stark warning for all Americans, as we see the rapid expansion of state and federal cooperation through police task forces. So far, the courts have treated this cooperation as a justification for extending immunities and denying Americans remedies when their rights are violated. IJ will continue its work nationwide to restore real accountability when government officials violate constitutional rights—including in cases challenging qualified immunity, task-force immunity, federal immunity, and all other doctrines that place obstacles between the rights of Americans and remedies in American courtrooms.