Robert A. Rush, P.A. is now Rush & Frisco Law

Get Your Risk Free Consultation*

24/7 Legal Help: (352) 373-7566

Call Now

24/7 Legal Help

Civil Rights FAQS

Call Us 24/7 For Legal Help:

Helping You in Understanding Your Rights

"Civil rights" refer to the rights of individuals to receive equal treatment (and to be free from unfair treatment or discrimination) in a variety of settings, based on certain legally protected characteristics. In the United States, civil rights are primarily derived from the Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights, as well as federal and state laws.

Here's an overview of key civil rights:

  1. Equal Protection: The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees that all individuals receive "equal protection of the laws." This means that the government cannot discriminate against someone based on protected characteristics such as race, national origin, gender, and religion.

  2. Freedom of Speech, Press, and Assembly: The First Amendment protects the rights of individuals to speak freely, publish opinions, and gather together peacefully. However, these rights are not absolute and can be limited in certain circumstances.

  3. Freedom of Religion: The First Amendment also ensures the right to practice one's religion (or no religion at all) without government interference or coercion.

  4. Right to Vote: Various amendments (such as the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th) protect the right to vote and prohibit discrimination in voting based on race, gender, and age (for those 18 and older).

  5. Rights of the Accused: The Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments provide several rights to those accused of crimes, including protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, the right to a fair trial, the right to remain silent, protection against double jeopardy and cruel and unusual punishment, and other legal protections.

  6. Civil Rights Act of 1964: This pivotal federal law prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, gender, or national origin in various contexts, including employment, education, and public accommodations.

  7. Voting Rights Act of 1965: This law aims to eliminate racial discrimination in voting, particularly in areas with a history of discriminatory practices.

  8. Fair Housing Act: Prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, or financing of housing based on race, color, religion, gender, national origin, familial status, or disability.

  9. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in employment, transportation, public accommodations, communications, and government activities.

  10. Right to Privacy: While not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, the right to privacy has been recognized by the Supreme Court as a fundamental right, protecting individuals from government intrusion into certain personal and intimate areas of their lives.

  11. Rights Related to Reproduction and Marriage: Over the years, the courts have recognized rights related to personal decisions about marriage, family, and reproduction, including the right to marry a person of the same sex and the right to access birth control and abortion.

  12. Education Rights: Laws like Title IX prohibit discrimination based on gender in federally funded education programs and activities.

These are broad overviews, and the application and nuances of these rights can vary based on specifics of individual cases and jurisdictions. If you feel that your civil rights have been violated or if you have questions about your rights in specific situations, it is advisable to consult with an attorney or legal expert specializing in civil rights law.

Yes, excessive force by law enforcement officers is considered a violation of your civil rights. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects citizens from "unreasonable searches and seizures." The use of excessive or unreasonable force by law enforcement officers in the course of carrying out their duties is considered a "seizure" under this amendment. If law enforcement officers use excessive force during an arrest or another type of encounter with a citizen, it can be considered a violation of that person's Fourth Amendment rights. When evaluating whether the force used was "excessive" or "unreasonable," courts often consider the totality of the circumstances, including:
  1. Severity of the Crime: The nature of the offense or crime the individual was suspected of committing.
  2. Immediate Threat: Whether the individual posed an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others.
  3. Active Resistance: Whether the individual was actively resisting arrest or attempting to flee.
  4. Feasibility of Warnings: Whether officers provided warnings or instructions and the person's compliance or lack thereof.
  5. Proportionality: Whether the force used was proportional to the threat or resistance encountered.
It's worth noting that not all uses of force by law enforcement are considered excessive or unreasonable. Police officers are often faced with situations where they need to make split-second decisions about the amount of force required to protect themselves and others. However, when that force goes beyond what is objectively reasonable given the circumstances, it can be considered excessive and a violation of civil rights. Victims of excessive force can seek redress through various avenues, including filing a complaint against the police department, seeking criminal charges against the officers involved, or filing a civil lawsuit claiming a violation of their civil rights under federal law (often referred to as a "Section 1983" lawsuit after the relevant section of the U.S. Code). If someone believes they have been a victim of excessive force, it's crucial to consult with an attorney experienced in civil rights litigation to understand their rights and potential remedies.

Determining whether excessive force was used by law enforcement typically involves a careful review of all the facts and circumstances surrounding the incident. This assessment is generally guided by the "reasonableness" standard. Here's how the determination is usually made:

  1. Objective Reasonableness Standard: The U.S. Supreme Court, in the landmark case Graham v. Connor (1989), established that the appropriateness of use of force by law enforcement officers must be judged on an "objective reasonableness" standard. This means the evaluation is based on what a reasonable officer would have done in the same situation, given the facts and circumstances known to the officer at the time, without the benefit of hindsight.

  2. Totality of Circumstances: Courts will assess the entirety of the situation, including:

    • The severity of the crime at issue.
    • Whether the suspect posed an immediate threat to the safety of officers or others.
    • Whether the suspect was actively resisting arrest or trying to flee.
  3. Nature and Degree of Force: The specific type and amount of force used will be scrutinized against the backdrop of the situation. For example, using a firearm against an unarmed, non-resisting individual may be deemed excessive, while using it against an armed, aggressive suspect may not be.

  4. Comparative Analysis: Comparisons might be drawn with how other officers in similar situations have acted or with departmental policies or training.

  5. Injuries Inflicted: The severity and nature of any injuries sustained by the individual can provide evidence of the degree of force used. Severe or fatal injuries might be evidence of excessive force, but lack of injury doesn't necessarily mean force was reasonable.

  6. Officer Testimony and Perspective: Officers involved will typically provide their account of events, explaining their perceptions, assessments of threat, and reasons for employing force.

  7. Witness Testimony: Bystanders, other officers, and the individual against whom the force was used (if possible) can provide crucial perspectives on the incident.

  8. Video and Audio Evidence: In today's age of technology, many incidents might be captured on video (body cameras, dashcams, security cameras, or cell phones). This footage can offer invaluable, albeit sometimes incomplete, insights into the event.

  9. Departmental Policies and Training: Reviewing the standards and training provided to officers can help determine whether the force used was in line with accepted practices.

  10. Expert Testimony: Often, experts in law enforcement tactics, use of force, and related areas may be called upon in legal proceedings to offer opinions on whether the force used was excessive.

It's essential to understand that the determination of excessive force isn't always clear-cut. It often requires weighing multiple factors and can vary based on jurisdiction, specific facts of the case, and the opinions of those reviewing the incident. When allegations of excessive force arise, it's often beneficial for all parties involved to seek legal counsel to navigate the complexities of such determinations.

The time limit for filing a civil rights complaint, often referred to as the statute of limitations, can vary based on several factors, including the nature of the violation, the jurisdiction, and the specific law or provision under which you are filing. Here's a general overview:

  1. Federal Civil Rights Laws:

    • Under Section 1983, which allows individuals to sue for civil rights violations committed by state or local officials, the statute of limitations is not federally defined. Instead, it borrows the personal injury statute of limitations from the state in which the violation occurred. This can range from one to six years, depending on the state.
    • For employment discrimination cases under federal laws like Title VII, the ADA, or the ADEA, a complainant generally must first file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) within 180 days from the day the discrimination took place. This can be extended to 300 days if a state or local agency enforces a law that prohibits employment discrimination on the same basis.
  2. State Civil Rights Laws:

    • Each state may have its civil rights laws with specific statutes of limitations. The time limits can vary widely, so it's essential to check the laws in the relevant state.
  3. Other Federal Laws:

    • For housing discrimination under the Fair Housing Act, you have one year to file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and two years to file a lawsuit in federal court.
    • For voting rights complaints under the Voting Rights Act, there is no specific statute of limitations, but general federal or state statutes may apply.
  4. Administrative Complaints:

    • Some civil rights complaints, especially those related to employment or housing, might first require an administrative complaint to be filed with a specific agency (like the EEOC for employment issues). The time limits for these complaints are often shorter than for filing a lawsuit.
  5. Special Circumstances:

    • In certain situations, the statute of limitations can be tolled, or paused, such as when the victim is a minor or mentally incompetent. However, the rules for tolling also vary by jurisdiction and the nature of the claim.

Given the complexity and variability in statutes of limitations, if you believe your civil rights have been violated, it's crucial to consult with a legal professional as soon as possible. They can provide guidance specific to your situation and ensure you don't miss any critical deadlines.

At Rush & Frisco, we pride ourselves on our dedication to our clients, our extensive experience, and our proven track record. Here's why you should consider us to represent you:
  1. Expertise and Experience: Our attorneys have combined decades of experience in handling cases like yours. This depth of knowledge means we're well-equipped to navigate the complexities of the legal system on your behalf.
  2. Personalized Attention: We prioritize building a strong attorney-client relationship. This means you're not just a case number to us. We take the time to understand your unique circumstances, needs, and goals.
  3. Proven Track Record: Our history of successful case outcomes speaks volumes about our capability and dedication. While past success doesn't guarantee future outcomes, it does highlight our commitment to achieving the best possible results for our clients.
  4. Transparent Communication: We believe in keeping our clients informed at every step. You'll always know where your case stands, and we're here to answer any questions you may have.
  5. Resourceful Approach: Our firm has access to a network of expert witnesses, investigators, and other resources that can be invaluable in building a strong case.
  6. Contingency Fee Structure: For personal injury cases and several other types of legal matters, we work on a contingency fee basis. This means you don't pay unless we win your case.
  7. Ethical Standards: We uphold the highest ethical standards. Our reputation is built on trust, integrity, and a commitment to justice.
Choosing the right legal representation is a crucial decision, and we're here to provide the expertise and dedication you deserve. Let us fight for your rights and work towards the best possible outcome for your case.