Supreme Court Denies Reinink v. Hart After 8 Relists; Thomas and Alito Dissent
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in Reinink v. Hart after eight relistings, with two justices dissenting.
Why it matters: The Court’s rare eight-time relisting highlights deep divisions over qualified immunity and police use of force, crucial issues for civil rights litigation attorneys.
- The Court denied certiorari after eight separate relistings from December 2025 to May 2026, signaling intense deliberation.
- Justices Thomas and Alito dissented, urging the Court to reverse the lower court’s decision based on a lower judge’s dissenting opinion.
- Reinink v. Hart involves Fourth Amendment claims about the reasonableness of police force and limits on qualified immunity.
- The petition was filed on August 11, 2025; respondents waived their response on September 15, 2025, a common procedural tactic in complex civil rights cases.
The Supreme Court’s decision to deny certiorari in Reinink v. Hart after eight separate relistings is an unusual procedural move rarely seen at the highest court. These multiple rounds of review, spanning from December 2025 through May 2026, suggest significant internal debate about the case’s legal issues.
The petition challenges important Fourth Amendment questions involving when police use of force is deemed reasonable and how courts apply qualified immunity — the legal doctrine that can shield officers from liability unless a constitutional right was clearly established. These questions are central to many civil rights lawsuits alleging police misconduct.
Justices Thomas and Alito dissented from the denial, recommending the Court summarily reverse the lower court’s ruling. Their dissent cites a dissenting opinion by Judge Larsen at the appellate level, who argued that the lower court erred in applying qualified immunity. Though Judge Larsen’s full opinion has not been publicly disclosed, Thomas and Alito’s reliance on it underscores distinct divisions among judges regarding qualified immunity’s scope.
The case’s procedural timeline began with the petition filed on August 11, 2025. Notably, the respondents waived their right to file a response on September 15, 2025 — a tactic sometimes used to expedite Supreme Court consideration or signal strategic legal positioning, particularly in complex civil rights cases involving police use of force.
This procedural back-and-forth and the justices’ split opinions reflect broader controversies within the Court over balancing protections for law enforcement with accountability for constitutional violations. For legal practitioners, the outcome impacts how lower courts will handle police use-of-force claims and qualified immunity defenses moving forward.
By the numbers:
- 8 — number of times the Supreme Court relisted Reinink v. Hart before denying certiorari
- August 11, 2025 — date the petition for certiorari was filed
- September 15, 2025 — date respondents waived response
Yes, but: While the rare procedural relisting points to intense deliberation, the Supreme Court did ultimately deny certiorari, leaving existing qualified immunity precedents intact for now.
What's next: Future petitions challenging qualified immunity and police use-of-force standards are expected, as the Court continues to grapple with these contentious issues.