They key difference here is whether you care more about bad officers facing consequences or the victims getting compensation.
Eliminating qualified immunity only helps with the second part and does zero with respect to the first, but advocates of reform never make that clear.
Even with qualified immunity sometimes victims win judgments. On the other hand indemnification is 100% universal and effective at protecting cops. No cop ever pays anything out of his own pocket, period.
I have a feeling that if municipalities start having to pay out lots of settlements for civil rights abuses by police, they'll start reconsidering the limits of indemnification.
Eliminating qualified immunity only helps with the second part and does zero with respect to the first, but advocates of reform never make that clear.
Even with qualified immunity sometimes victims win judgments. On the other hand indemnification is 100% universal and effective at protecting cops. No cop ever pays anything out of his own pocket, period.