Connecticut police officers have violated the Fourth Amendment rights of innocent gun owners so egregiously that all three liberal judges on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on Monday, ruling that their Fourth Amendment-protected right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures had been severely violated.
The Court's decisions confirm that citizens' exercise of their Second Amendment-protected right to keep and bear weapons in their vehicles does not put them at risk of police violating their Fourth Amendment-protected right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
In this case, not only were the rights of Connecticut resident Bassel Skane violated, but he was also stripped of $320 in cash and a USB flash drive — all because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, stopped by police officers, dragged from his car, verbally and physically abused by the officers, handcuffed, and forced to sit in the back of a patrol car for over 30 minutes.
To add insult to injury, 10 Connecticut State Police officers showed up to support the offending officer, Nicholas Andrzejski, but none of them called out this outrage or prevented further violations of Mr. Soukane's rights.
When this case, which began with Soukne's wrongful arrest in 2018, is finally resolved, the Connecticut State Police and Connecticut taxpayers will stand to pay significant amounts of money in restitution for this outrage.
And gun owners who exercise their Second Amendment-protected rights will have the assurance that they will not face similar harassment in the future from overzealous but poorly trained police officers who use the Fourth Amendment as a shield.
From the court transcript:
At approximately 8:43 p.m. on November 12, 2018, Basel Soukane parked his car with the engine running on the side of the road in Waterbury, Connecticut.
The GPS on Soukane's iPhone, which was in a holder attached to the car's dashboard, froze, so he stopped the car to get it fixed.
The area was “known as a dark, high-crime area known for prostitution, drug dealing and other criminal activity.”
Seconds after Soukane pulled over, Officer Nicholas Andrzejewski approached the car, knocked on the driver's side window and, according to Soukane, loudly demanded his driver's license.
The interior lights were on, so even though it was dark, Andrzejewski was able to see inside the car by approaching the window.
Soukane complied and handed over his license, but also handed Andrzejewski a ostensibly valid firearms permit.
At that time, Soukane also told Andrzejewski that he legally possessed a handgun in the driver's side door compartment pursuant to a permit.
Until now, this has been routine traffic enforcement — seeing a car idling on the side of the road in a high-crime area at night is sure to pique an officer's curiosity.
But then things went from bad to worse.
After the exchange, Andrzejewski ordered Skane to exit the vehicle, after which Skane said Andrzejewski violently “dragged him out of the vehicle,” threw him to the ground, yelled at him, handcuffed him, and searched him, but no weapons or contraband were found.
Andrzejewski then “forced (Sokane) into the back seat of (Andrzejewski's) patrol car”, leaving Soukane “lying semi-crouched on the floor of the vehicle”.
“He remained in that position, looking down and unable to see anything, until another officer arrived a few minutes later and helped him sit down,” Soukane said.
Chicago Police officers then searched Soukane's car and trunk, confiscating $320 and a flash drive, according to a footnote, which adds that “it is unclear from the records whether Mr. Soukane ever actually faced any charges.”
Soukane sued in 2019, seeking “compensatory and punitive damages.” Andrzejewski's lawyers argued that the officers were simply performing their duties and had “reasonable suspicion and probable cause” (under the Fourth Amendment) to treat Soukane as they did. The officer also argued that he had “qualified immunity” in case the court did not accept his initial false claims.
When the court ruled in Soukane's favour, Andrzejewski appealed, and his sentence remained unchanged.
Plaintiff-appellant Basel Soukane's alleged conduct is that during the course of a routine traffic stop, Andrzejewski unlawfully and violently handcuffed Soukane and restrained him in the back of a police vehicle for over 30 minutes and, after Soukane ostensibly presented a valid firearms permit and indicated that he possessed a firearm pursuant to that permit, searched Soukane's vehicle without a warrant.
On appeal, Andrzejewski argues that the district court’s denial of qualified immunity should be overturned because the presence of a lawfully owned firearm in the vehicle provided probable cause to detain Soukane and search the interior and trunk of the vehicle.
Having drawn all permissible factual inferences in Soukane's favor, as we must do on summary judgment, we agree with the district court's judgment. The evidence supports a conclusion that Andrzejewski violated Soukane's Fourth Amendment right free from unreasonable searches and seizures when he detained Soukane and when he conducted a warrantless search of Soukane's car and trunk.
Andrzejewski did not have qualified immunity for this conduct, and therefore the district court properly denied his motion for summary judgment.
“However, regardless of whether the Second Amendment applies, individuals who lawfully bear arms should not be punished by abridging their Fourth Amendment rights,” the court, made up of three liberal justices appointed by Biden and Obama, noted.
Andrzejewski's lawyers could appeal to the Grand Circuit Court or even the Supreme Court, but such an appeal is unlikely to succeed given the officer's outrageous conduct and the complicity of 10 other officers who showed up in his support and continued to deny Skane his rights.
The Second and Fourth Amendments to the Constitution provide strong protections for our precious God-given rights. It is unfortunate that Mr. Skane had to endure such punishment and judicial delay before justice was served. Fortunately, the police's outrageous actions forced three notoriously liberal justices to write in support of both the Second and Fourth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
