> But the problem with that argument, the appeals court ruled, is that courts have long held that police cannot be on the hook for property damage caused in the process of trying to make an arrest.
That was a rather different problem than directly harassing the unlawfully searched person.
In that case it was incompetence, gross negligence, and so on. Naturally it's hard to prove in court that the court's enforcement arm is at fault.
And at first the guy tried to sue for damages but that was thrown out - because it's so well established - but still that's the point that should be hammered.
> But the problem with that argument, the appeals court ruled, is that courts have long held that police cannot be on the hook for property damage caused in the process of trying to make an arrest.