If an officer's action is found to be in bad faith, what is a likely consequence regarding immunity?

• A. Immunity increases.
• B. No liability is possible.
• C. Sovereign immunity protection may be lost.
• D. The agency automatically suspends the officer.

Answer: (C)

When an officer acts in bad faith, the justification for immunity protections typically falls away. Immunity is meant to shield officials who are doing their job within the law and without deliberate harm. Bad faith—acting with intentional dishonesty, malicious intent, or reckless disregard for others’ rights—shows a level of culpability that immunity does not cover. Because of that, sovereign immunity protection may be lost, opening the door to liability for the officer and potentially the agency as well in certain situations.

Increasing immunity would be inappropriate here, and claiming no liability is possible contradicts the purpose of bad-faith findings. Automatic suspension by the agency is not the immunity concept at issue, and disciplinary action isn’t the same as losing immunity.