Using qi to avoid deciding 4A issues
One common and obvious criticism of qualified immunity (qi) law, as it currently stands, is that it provides court with an avenue to avoid deciding Fourth Amendment (4A) issues that the courts should be deciding. This does happen. However, my impression after following civil cases against the police for several years now, is that this judicial dodge happens less frequently than I would have guessed that it does.
That said, here is an example of a prestigious and authoritative appellate court using qi to avoid deciding a 4A issue that, IMHO, should have been decided: