The killing of a 16-week-old rescue puppy in New Orleans exposes a troubling question about American law: what happens when a police officer violates someone’s constitutional rights but is protected from personal civil liability?

On 10 April 2021, a 16-week-old rescue puppy named Apollo was shot three times by a New Orleans police officer. He died in his family’s arms.

Five years later, the case has become about something much larger than the killing of one puppy. It has exposed an uncomfortable distinction within the American legal system: a police officer can be found to have violated someone’s constitutional rights and still be protected from personal liability for that violation.

That protection is called qualified immunity.

For Apollo’s family, Derek Brown and Julia Barecki-Brown, it has become a central obstacle in their pursuit of accountability. In June 2025, a federal jury found that Officer Derrick Burmaster had acted in an objectively unreasonable manner when he shot Apollo. Yet the same jury concluded that he was entitled to qualified immunity.

On 14 July 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld that outcome.

The question is not just why Apollo was shot. It is why a finding of unconstitutional conduct did not result in personal civil liability for the officer who killed him.

What happened to Apollo?

Police had attended the family’s New Orleans home following a neighbour’s report of an argument. Officer Burmaster and another officer entered the property’s courtyard.

According to the factual account considered in earlier court proceedings, Burmaster had made kissing noises while approaching the property, apparently attempting to establish whether dogs were present. When a dog barked, he drew his firearm before seeing either animal.

His fellow officer indicated that they should leave the courtyard and retreated through the gate. Burmaster remained.

Two dogs subsequently came down the stairs. One moved away. Apollo, the smaller dog, ran towards Burmaster with his tail wagging.

The court record describes a puppy who did not growl, jump, bare his teeth or lunge. Apollo weighed approximately 22 pounds, or 10 kilograms.

Burmaster fired three shots. Apollo died in his owners’ arms.

The officer maintained that he feared being bitten and disputed the characterisation of Apollo as non-threatening. But the earlier appellate proceedings identified significant factual questions about the puppy’s behaviour, the officer’s opportunity to withdraw and the availability of alternatives to shooting.

Those questions eventually reached a jury.

What is qualified immunity?

Qualified immunity is a doctrine developed through American court decisions. It protects government officials, including police officers, from personal liability for damages in certain civil-rights lawsuits.

It does not mean that an officer has acted correctly. Nor does it mean that an officer’s actions were lawful. In broad terms, someone seeking damages must establish not only that an official violated a constitutional right, but also that the right was sufficiently clearly established at the time.

This second requirement can become a formidable obstacle.

Courts examine whether existing law would have made it clear to a reasonable officer that the conduct was unlawful. Previous judgments involving comparable circumstances can be particularly important, although the law does not invariably require an earlier case with identical facts.

The distinction creates a situation that many people would find difficult to reconcile with ordinary expectations of justice. An officer’s conduct can violate the Constitution, yet the officer may still avoid personal liability under federal civil-rights law.

The precedent that makes this case particularly interesting

There is an important complication in Apollo’s case that deserves attention.

In 2024, the Fifth Circuit decided another case, Ramirez v. Killian, involving a police officer who shot a family’s dog after the animal approached without displaying aggression.

In that judgment, the court recognised that, by June 2016, it was clearly established that an officer could not constitutionally kill a companion dog without reasonably believing that the animal posed a threat and that an attack was imminent.

Apollo was killed in April 2021, the timing is significant.

When Burmaster initially sought qualified immunity before trial, the district court refused to grant judgment in his favour because material facts remained disputed. In January 2025, the Fifth Circuit dismissed his appeal against that refusal.

The earlier appellate opinion went further in explaining that, viewed in the light most favourable to Apollo’s owners, the evidence could support a finding that Burmaster violated clearly established law.

The court referred to Apollo’s size, his wagging tail, the absence of lunging or jumping, the officer’s opportunity to leave and the availability of other means of responding. Yet this did not settle the question of immunity.

The case proceeded to trial, where the jury was required to assess the evidence and apply the legal standards provided by the judge. The jury found that Burmaster had acted unreasonably but was nevertheless entitled to qualified immunity.

There is an important legal distinction here. The earlier appellate decision considered the evidence under rules requiring disputed facts to be viewed favourably to the family. It was not a final determination of what happened. The later jury reached its verdict after trial.

Even allowing for that distinction, the sequence raises a serious question about how the legal protection operates in practice. If courts had already recognised constitutional protection against the unjustified killing of non-threatening companion dogs, why did that protection not result in personal liability in Apollo’s case?

The July 2026 appellate judgment upheld the procedure used to submit the immunity question to the jury. It did not provide a new factual account explaining exactly how the jury reconciled its two findings.

For those examining police accountability, that distinction deserves far greater public attention.

Share

On 30 August 2026, a one-year-old miniature donkey named HeeHaw was shot and killed by a police officer in Georgia, United States. He was standing in a pasture belonging to Elsberry Riding and Farm when officers entered the property during a search for a missing 12-year-old girl.

HeeHaw was not a wild animal. He was a dom…

Read more

When people think about animal welfare in Bali, they often picture the island’s free roaming dogs sleeping outside temples, wandering village streets or resting on beaches. What they usually do not see is the issue that has shaped dog policy on the island for more than a decade. Rabies.

Dogs are not being collected on a mass scale. There is no nationwide…

Read more

Across the world, dogs are being taken from streets and communities and placed into publicly funded shelters, municipal facilities, pounds and other forms of accommodation. Governments and local authorities spend public money collecting, housing and managing those dogs, yet in many places it can be surprisingly difficult to establish something as basic …

Read more

The investigation into Miranda’s Rescue in Humboldt County, California has taken another significant turn, this time involving the California Attorney General and the animals reportedly still remaining at the rescue.

A formal complaint has been filed with the Attorney General’s Offi…

Read more

California now has a proposal in front of it that could fundamentally change the way animal rescues, shelters and other companion animal organisations are overseen across the state.

On 24 August, supporters of a proposed Bureau of Companion Animal Welfare formally launched their plans at the California State Capitol in Sacramento. We knew this proposal w…

Read more

For weeks we have been asking one very simple question about the dogs who entered Miranda’s Rescue in Humboldt County, California. Who was responsible for making sure those dogs could ultimately be accounted for? We know there were authorities responsible for land use and the permits attached to the property, we know law enforcement can investigate susp…

Read more

Sri Lanka has just achieved a significant achievement in the reform of its animal welfare laws after a long period of delay. The Animal Welfare Bill, which has been long awaited, has now been published and is thus before Parliament, representing an important advance towards replacing laws that have stayed almost unchanged for over a century.

To animal we…

Read more

It is reported that Leda, Goat and Lane were taken to Corpus Christi Animal Care Services having survived a fire in a residential house.

The dogs are said to have been taken in on 2 June 2026, and the appeals stated that they urgently needed to be placed in a rescue home and also required additional medical treatment. As concern over their worsening con…

Read more

Meta has allowed a Facebook video, which shows a clearly distressed young kitten being hung by the skin around its neck to stay on the internet after it had decided that the video did not violate its Community Standards.

The video was uploaded by a Facebook page named diyarcat; it depicts a black and white kitten being held up without any support under i…

Read more

Animal welfare organisations across the world are familiar with a difficult reality. Governments often create animal welfare laws, establish standards of care and introduce new obligations, yet much of the practical work is carried out by charities, shelters and volunteers operating under constant financial pressure.

That reality is now at the centre of …

Read more

A greyhound named Soda Apache found himself at the centre of a regulatory case in Australia after returning a positive test for cocaine before a race at The Meadows in Victoria. What followed was a lengthy legal process focused on a trainer, a tribunal and questions of industry integrity. Yet the dog at the heart of the case was largely absent from the …

Read more

Every now and then we come across a campaign that feels as though it has been part of our journey long before we ever knew its name.

This week we had the privilege of meeting with the team behind Holly’s Law. It was one of those conversations where the connection was obvious from the very beginning. We spoke about animals, about violence, about safeguard…

Read more

In January 2026, two dogs were left alone inside an apartment in Oklahoma after their owners were taken into custody during an immigration enforcement operation carried out by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

According to reports published several months later, the dogs remained inside the property for approximately one week before neighbo…

Read more

Australia is not a High-Risk Shelter Pressure Zone. At least not yet. However, there are enough warning signs emerging across parts of the country to justify closer attention.

Unlike the United States, where shelter pressure is often measured through very large numbers of animals entering the system and significant euthanasia figures, Australia’s situati…

Read more

Much of Dog Desk Animal Action’s Shelter Pressure project focuses on countries where shelters are struggling to absorb the number of animals entering their care.

In some countries, that pressure results in overcrowding. In others, it contributes to euthanasia. Elsewhere, it raises concerns about long-term welfare, capacity and the ability of shelters to …

Read more

When people think about dog welfare crises, they often picture dogs living on the streets. The United States presents a different challenge.

There is no nationwide stray dog crisis. There is no government programme removing millions of free-roaming dogs from public spaces. There are no mass collection targets comparable to those being debated in some par…

Read more

When South Korea’s National Assembly voted to ban the breeding, slaughter and sale of dogs for human consumption in January 2024, the decision was widely celebrated as a landmark victory for animal welfare. By February 2027, the dog meat industry will become illegal nationwide.

Yet one difficult question remains: what happens to the dogs?

The answer is m…

Read more

I rarely support petitions.

Over the years I have seen too many petitions reduce complex issues to slogans, create unnecessary alarm or present worst case scenarios as established facts. Good intentions do not always lead to good outcomes, and sometimes a poorly framed campaign can make it harder to have the very conversation it was intended to start.

Tha…

Read more

Public opinion is often invoked in debates about Turkey’s street dogs. Politicians cite it. Commentators cite it. Campaigners cite it. Yet surprisingly few people stop to look at what the public has actually been saying.

Two major surveys conducted during one of the most contentious periods in Turkey’s animal welfare history paint a picture that is more …

Read more