⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Sixth Circuit hears the Redmond family's civil appeal following a child's death after a car crash in Michigan. In August twenty twenty, three children were in a car that their babysitter allegedly crashed into a tree. The children returned to her home in Roseville, where one child died the next morning. The family later sued police officers and the city over their response that night. A federal judge entered summary judgment for two officers and the city, ending those claims without a trial. Summary judgment is proper only when no genuine dispute over an outcome-relevant fact requires a trial and the moving party is entitled to win under the law. The family's claims focus on police inaction, rather than officers inflicting the injuries themselves. It will ask the appeals court to let those claims proceed. One issue is state-created danger: a constitutional theory requiring, among other things, official action that creates or increases a particular risk from private harm. Simply failing to protect someone is generally not enough under the Due Process Clause. Qualified immunity can shield officers from federal damages claims unless they violated a clearly established right that a reasonable officer would have known.

Gerald Redmond, et al. v. Timothy Hertz, et al. (No. 25-1935) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, argued October 22, 2026.