Three states have passed laws restricting qualified immunity in their own courts: Colorado, New Mexico, and Connecticut. New York City has done the same by local ordinance. Every other state still allows government officials to raise the defense in state-court civil rights lawsuits, and qualified immunity remains fully available in federal court nationwide no matter where the case is filed. If you are looking for the list of states that do not have qualified immunity, that is the complete list as of the most recent reforms.
What Qualified Immunity Is, Briefly
Qualified immunity is not a statute. It is a doctrine the Supreme Court built through its own decisions, starting with Pierson v. Ray in 1967 and reshaped by Harlow v. Fitzgerald in 1982.1Justia. Harlow v Fitzgerald, 457 US 800 (1982) Under the modern test, a government official is shielded from a civil rights lawsuit unless their conduct violated a “clearly established” right that a reasonable person would have known about. In practice, that usually means the plaintiff must point to an earlier court decision with very similar facts. If no such precedent exists, the case gets dismissed before a jury ever hears it.
Because courts made the doctrine, courts can change it, and states can pass laws that route around it for claims brought under their own constitutions.2Congress.gov. Qualified Immunity and Section 1983 That is what the three states below have done.
Colorado
Colorado acted first. The Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity Act (SB 20-217), passed in 2020, creates a private right of action against any peace officer who, acting under color of law, deprives someone of rights protected by the Colorado Bill of Rights. The statute states explicitly that qualified immunity is not a defense.3Colorado General Assembly. Senate Bill 20-217 – Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity
The law adds personal financial exposure for officers found liable who did not act in good faith. They can be held personally responsible for up to $25,000 in damages, with the employing agency generally covering the rest. The law applies to peace officers specifically, not to all government employees.
New Mexico
New Mexico passed the New Mexico Civil Rights Act in 2021. It reaches further than Colorado’s law: it applies to any public employee, not just law enforcement. Anyone acting on behalf of a government body who violates rights secured by the state’s Bill of Rights can be sued, and qualified immunity cannot be raised as a defense. Liability for government entities is capped at $2 million per claim, and attorney fees and costs are counted inside that cap.4New Mexico Legislature. New Mexico Civil Rights Act – House Bill 4
The attorney-fees point matters. Civil rights cases are expensive to litigate, and when fees eat into the same ceiling as damages, the economics of bringing a case look different than in a jurisdiction where fees are awarded separately.
Connecticut
Connecticut’s 2020 Police Accountability Act creates a cause of action against police officers for violations of rights protected by the state constitution. It does not use the words “qualified immunity is abolished” the way Colorado’s and New Mexico’s laws do. It changes the structure instead. An officer’s municipal employer must indemnify them unless a court finds the officer’s conduct was malicious, wanton, or willful.
The effect is that the lawsuit proceeds on the merits rather than being blocked at the threshold by a “clearly established law” argument. The officer is not personally on the hook unless they acted with deliberate disregard, but the plaintiff gets their day in court.
New York City
New York City is not a state, but it is the first major city to restrict qualified immunity by ordinance, and that is worth knowing if you live there. Local Law 48, passed in 2021, creates a local right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures and from excessive force by police. If an NYPD employee allegedly violates either right, the person can bring a civil action within three years, and the officer cannot raise qualified immunity or any substantially equivalent defense.5New York City Council. Council Votes To End Qualified Immunity
The scope is narrower than the state reforms. The ordinance covers only search-and-seizure and excessive-force claims against police, not every kind of constitutional violation by every government employee.
Federal Lawsuits Still Face the Defense
None of these state reforms touch federal law. If you sue a government official for violating a right protected by the U.S. Constitution, the lawsuit typically proceeds under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and the official can still raise qualified immunity as the Supreme Court has defined it.6Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 42 USC 1983 – Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights That is true in Colorado, New Mexico, Connecticut, and New York City the same as everywhere else.
This creates a parallel system. The same incident can produce two claims: one under the state constitution in state court, where qualified immunity is off the table, and one under § 1983 in federal court, where it is not. The federal claim might be dismissed on immunity grounds while the state claim proceeds.
Watch Out for Removal
Government defendants sometimes try to move state-court lawsuits into federal court, a process called removal. Under federal law, a defendant can remove a case if it includes a claim arising under the Constitution or federal law.7Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 28 USC 1441 – Removal of Civil Actions If you file a case that mixes state constitutional claims with federal ones, you may hand the defendant a reason to move the whole thing to federal court. A plaintiff who wants to keep a case in state court, where qualified immunity does not apply, should think carefully about whether to include federal claims in the same lawsuit at all.
Every Other State
In every state outside the three listed above, qualified immunity is still available to government defendants in state-court civil rights actions. Reform bills have been introduced in many legislatures and gone nowhere. Massachusetts created a commission in 2020 to study the doctrine rather than restrict it; that commission was supposed to report by September 2021, and no bill eliminating the defense has followed.
The political argument on one side comes from police unions and law enforcement organizations, who say removing the defense will make officers hesitant to act and will expose them to personal liability. Civil rights advocates say the doctrine makes misconduct nearly impossible to hold anyone accountable for. So far, in most legislatures, the law enforcement position has prevailed. If you live outside Colorado, New Mexico, Connecticut, or New York City, assume qualified immunity is on the table in any civil rights suit you file.
What Removing Qualified Immunity Actually Changes
The headline matters less than the mechanics. The biggest practical effect of these laws is not larger verdicts. It is that cases survive long enough to be heard. Under the federal doctrine, a defendant can move to dismiss before the plaintiff gets any access to evidence. The state laws eliminate that early exit. Plaintiffs reach the discovery phase, where body camera footage, internal records, and witness testimony become available. That shift changes settlement dynamics even in cases that never reach a jury.
Removing the defense does not remove the underlying burden. You still have to prove the official actually violated your rights under the state constitution. The reform only ensures the case is decided on what happened rather than on whether an earlier court addressed the same facts.
If You Are Thinking About Filing
A few practical points apply even in the states that have reformed the doctrine.
Most states require written notice to the government before you can file a lawsuit, and the notice deadline is usually much shorter than the overall statute of limitations. Missing it can end your case before it starts. NYC’s Local Law 48 gives you three years from the date of the violation to file suit.5New York City Council. Council Votes To End Qualified Immunity Other jurisdictions set their own windows, and some have separate, shorter notice-of-claim periods layered on top.
Filing fees for civil lawsuits in state court generally run from about $75 to $500 depending on the court, with additional costs for service and other procedural steps. Attorney fees in civil rights litigation can reach tens of thousands of dollars. Some lawyers take these cases on contingency, collecting a percentage of any recovery instead of charging upfront, but whether a lawyer will agree depends on the strength of the case and the likely damages. In New Mexico, remember that attorney fees come out of the same $2 million ceiling as everything else you recover.4New Mexico Legislature. New Mexico Civil Rights Act – House Bill 4