Aguayo v. Peters

On January 8, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a pivotal ruling in Aguayo v. Peters. The case stemmed from a 2021 traffic stop in Oregon, where Officer John Peters and other defendants allegedly used excessive force against Mario Aguayo during a minor infraction arrest, slamming him to the ground and causing severe spinal injuries. Aguayo filed a federal civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, asserting that the officers violated his Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable seizure. The district court had granted summary judgment for the officers based on qualified immunity, holding that the force was not clearly established as unconstitutional. The appellate court reversed in part, finding that a reasonable jury could conclude the officers’ actions were objectively unreasonable and that the law was clearly established at the time, thus stripping them of immunity and allowing the excessive force claim to proceed to trial.

The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment, denied qualified immunity to the officers, and remanded the case for further proceedings, allowing the excessive force claim to go to trial.

Whether the officers used excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and whether they were entitled to qualified immunity from suit.

The decision narrowed the application of qualified immunity in police excessive force cases within the Ninth Circuit, reinforcing judicial scrutiny of law enforcement conduct. It intensified national debates on police accountability and reform, drawing strong reactions from civil rights organizations and law enforcement unions.