Swint v. State of Alabama et al.

On January 27, 2026, in Montgomery, Alabama, police officers attempted to stop a vehicle matching a robbery suspect description. Jermaine Swint, a passenger, fled on foot and was shot in the back, resulting in permanent paralysis. Swint sued the State of Alabama, the City of Montgomery, and the involved officers, alleging excessive force under the Fourth Amendment and state tort claims. The defendants moved to dismiss, asserting Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity for the state and qualified immunity for the officers. Body-camera footage of the incident fueled local protests. Swint seeks compensatory and punitive damages, arguing the shooting was unjustified as he posed no immediate threat. The case tests the boundaries of government accountability in police use of deadly force.

The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama dismissed the claims against the State of Alabama on sovereign immunity grounds but denied the officers' motion for qualified immunity, holding that clearly established law prohibited deadly force against a non-threatening fleeing person. The city's motion was partially granted. The case is proceeding to discovery, with a trial date anticipated in late 2027.

Whether the State of Alabama is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment; whether the individual officers are entitled to qualified immunity for shooting a fleeing, non-dangerous suspect; and whether the City of Montgomery can be held liable under Monell for failing to train officers.

The case reignited national debate on qualified immunity and police reform. Civil rights groups cited Swint as a vivid example of the need for the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act. Alabama lawmakers faced renewed pressure to narrow state sovereign immunity in civil rights cases. The Montgomery Police Department announced a review of its use-of-force and foot-pursuit policies.