Black Lives Matter Can’t Be Sued, Judge Tells Police Officer
This short article simply reports that a police officer brought a lawsuit against Black Lives Matter because of the injuries that the police sustained while responding to protests. Chief Judge Brian Jackson said that Black Lives Matter is a social movement, so it cannot be sued. First of all, it is very obvious to see the change that today’s society has accomplished. The social justice rules the case in a very liberal manner. What the judge said was that an individual can sue against an individual, but not a social movement. However, this makes me wonder was there any case in the history that a particular party was accused because of an individual?
If we shift gears to the black community, we can easily sense the strong activism that lies in the Black Lives Matter. However, such report again can make people easily correlate violence with black power. Such accusation against the party makes me wonder the accuracy of the lawsuit. This article says that the police officer was anonymous. Is he a white or a black American? Were the injuries that he received caused by Black Lives Matter or someone else? Even though it is obvious to see the judge’s decision is based on the nature of laws: an individual cannot sue against a social movement, the racial tension is still present. What if this is a white party? Would the white party be sued also?
On the other hand, the voice from police officers is very intriguing. In society, we often focus on the goal and accomplishment of the movement. If the police were injured during the protest, what could they do? It is almost impossible to spot an individual who hurt the police officer and sue against this person during a protest. This article amplifies the judicial decision and makes the judicial legislation seem impartial. However, it is still contentious to celebrate the decision that is in favor of Black Lives Matter or a social movement, because the voice of police officers is sidelined and the racial tension is still fundamental. This article might again reinforce the cliche that black power is associated with violence.
I think that the main reason the movement cant be sued is because there is no direct leader of the organization. For instance one can sue a corporation or even a country (for instance the parents of Otto Warmbier are suing North Korea although i doubt it will have any affect). The BLM movement has founders but it often known as the movement without a leader. However, this brings about the question: If the BLM movement did have a leader, would it be fair to sue the whole movement because of the actions of one participant?
Personally i think its fair to sue the individual that assaulted the office but the movement as a whole seems improper.