It’s an interesting case.

California has a law on the books that grants immunity to government officials while performing certain tasks. One of those is during “prosecution” of a crime. The intent in immunizing those prosecuting a crime is to protect the attorneys and investigators associated with the prosecution effort from civil suits meant to intimidate or hamper that prosecution. It even goes as far as immunizing state actors even if they are engaged in “malicious prosecution”, weighing the net gain against the obvious downside.

State appeals courts have, since the mid-60s, interpreted that statute to include the “investigation” officers do at the scene, or before charging an individual, creating an “investigational immunity.” That’s what the CA State Supreme Court struck down here. The prosecutorial immunity remains, but applies only to those specifically noted in the laws, as written.

I look forward to seeing Justice Alito tell us why a hedge witch from the 1300s in Scotland while investigating poisonous berries and how her pact with the underworld has granted her an immunity is applicable to California State law.