After more than six years of legal tug-of-war, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 22, 2026 quietly stepped out of the fray and left one of Los Angeles’ most closely watched police shootings to a local jury.
By refusing to hear the city’s appeal, the court cleared the way for a civil trial over whether former LAPD officer Toni McBride used excessive force when she shot and killed Daniel Hernandez during a six-second confrontation in April 2020. The move leaves in place a Ninth Circuit ruling that found McBride’s first four shots were constitutionally reasonable but said a jury could decide the last two shots, fired after Hernandez had fallen, crossed the legal line. The long-running case now heads back to the trial court in Los Angeles.
High court leaves Ninth Circuit ruling in place
The Supreme Court on Monday turned down a petition from the Los Angeles city attorney’s office and declined to intervene, with Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. noting their objections, as reported by the Los Angeles Times. The city had urged the justices to review an en banc Ninth Circuit decision that revived the Hernandez family’s lawsuit after a lower court granted summary judgment on qualified-immunity grounds. City lawyers argued the appellate majority failed to account for the perspective of a reasonable officer making split-second, life-or-death decisions on a chaotic South L.A. street.
What the Ninth Circuit held
In a June 2, 2025 en banc opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit concluded that McBride was justified in firing her first four shots but that a jury could reasonably find the final two shots excessive. Those last rounds were fired after Hernandez had collapsed on his back and was rolling away. The court partially reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment, held that McBride was not entitled to qualified immunity on that portion of the claim, and sent the case back for further proceedings, as the Ninth Circuit explained in its opinion.
How the shooting unfolded
The encounter unfolded on April 22, 2020, at the scene of a multi-vehicle crash on San Pedro Street near East 32nd Street in Los Angeles. According to court records summarized by the Ninth Circuit, Hernandez, who had reportedly been cutting himself and was alleged to be under the influence of methamphetamine, climbed out of a damaged pickup truck holding a box cutter and advanced toward officers despite repeated commands to “drop the knife.” Body-camera and patrol-car video show McBride firing six shots over roughly six seconds, with the final two shots striking Hernandez after he had already fallen and failed to get back up immediately.
Why the case matters
The dispute drops squarely into the ongoing national fight over qualified immunity and how courts should judge on-the-spot police decisions. Legal observers say the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, and the Supreme Court’s decision to stay out of it, leave intact circuit precedent that requires officers to reassess the need for deadly force once a suspect appears incapacitated. As SCOTUSblog has noted, the high court has been highly selective about which qualified-immunity cases it hears, so every denial of review helps shape how these fights play out in front of juries.
What’s next for the Hernandez case
With the Supreme Court standing aside, the Ninth Circuit’s remand sends the case back to federal court in Los Angeles, where the plaintiffs can resume discovery and push for a civil trial. The estate and family of Daniel Hernandez are represented by a legal team that includes UC Berkeley law dean Erwin Chemerinsky. The city had sought Supreme Court review to preserve what it called necessary latitude for officers in fast-moving and dangerous encounters. The case now proceeds under the framework the Ninth Circuit set out in its June 2, 2025 opinion.
