Ehhh… this sounds like it might be the right decision.
While he was jailed he was acquitted and he did write a disruptive website. While his rights may have been violated - he doesn’t have a clear case that the police were blatantly harassing him and not trying to do their job.
You can make a case either way and I think the court just played Solomon and split the baby…
This is all related to a thing SCOTUS dreamed up out of whole cloth a few decades ago. Something called qualified immunity.
And it is not that he did not have a clear case it is that it would have been the FIRST case for THAT appeals court.
To put in very simply if the police officer beats the crap out of you because you... I don't know... maybe dated his former girl friend, and there has not been a case before the appeals court that charged a police officer on duty with beating the crap out of a citizen because they dated his former girl friend then "qualified immunity" kicks in and you can not sue him for violating your rights because without a previous case how could officer billy club know it was wrong to beat the crap out of someone because they were dating his former girlfriend.
I am neither joking or exaggerating. This was a chance for the SCOTUS to come out and say there is no qualified immunity for things that any employee of the state knows is blatantly wrong.
But they wimped.
Crap ruling.
This right here is British crown tyranny type stuff that led to the American Revolution.
If he can be jailed for 4 days and spend untold thousands of dollars defending himself for making cartoons, how long will it be before you or me can be jailed for disagreeing with or questioning authority.
This behavior and every person cop, prosecutor or politician should be held accountable. Qwikly and severely.