In this episode of the Guardian Mindset Podcast, Attorney Eric Daigle dives deep into the critical legal issues shaping modern protest response tactics. Broadcasting from Dallas, Daigle walks through the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Puente v. City of Phoenix, a pivotal case arising from a 2017 pro...
In this episode of the Guardian Mindset Podcast, Attorney Eric Daigle dives deep into the critical legal issues shaping modern protest response tactics. Broadcasting from Dallas, Daigle walks through the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Puente v. City of Phoenix, a pivotal case arising from a 2017 protest at a Trump rally. This case is more than a legal ruling—it’s a training roadmap for law enforcement navigating First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment obligations during high-tension demonstrations.
What You’ll Learn in This Episode:
-
How Puente v. Phoenix defines the limits of force in crowd control
-
Why the use of pepper balls and tear gas didn’t qualify as a "seizure"
-
What the “Shocks the Conscience” standard means for fast-moving protests
-
First Amendment obligations during “unlawful assembly” declarations
-
How planning, policy, and training helped officers maintain qualified immunity
-
The real-world consequences of unprofessional conduct—like commemorative coins gone wrong