At TalkLeft:
Should cities be allowed to insure themselves against claims of police brutality? The City of St. Paul agreed to host the Republican National Convention on the condition that Republican Party arranged "to buy insurance covering up to $10 million in damages and unlimited legal costs for law enforcement officials accused of brutality, violating civil rights and other misconduct." Private donations were used to purchase the insurance.
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/9/4/132716/4344
Moral hazard
I can definitely see the moral hazard here...if the only disincentive cities have to reign in brutality is the threat of a lawsuit, then doesn't insurance effectively neutralize that threat?
Of course, the moral hazard aside, what legal basis is there to prevent someone or some entity from buying insurance? Could a law be passed to that effect? I'm not sure myself, but if anybody would like to ask attorneys for free, you can get free legal advice here.
Nick from Avvo
Post new comment