article_snippet.sent: Pre-arrest, Gray's "seizure" would be judged by a "reasonableness" standard, under the Fourth Amendment.
article_snippet.sent: However, courts have limited these "seizures" to the initial act of seizing the person.
article_snippet.sent: Any excessive force claims after his arrest are not covered by the Fourth Amendment.
article_snippet.sent: The claims of an arrestee are instead governed by a different constitutional provision: the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.
article_snippet.sent: What's the difference between the Fourth and 14th Amendment anyway?
article_snippet.sent: Under the Fourth Amendment, the test is whether Any excessive force was objectively unreasonable based on the totality of the circumstances.
article_snippet.sent: Under the 14th Amendment standard, the officer will only be liable if Any excessive force was applied maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing unnecessary and wanton pain and suffering.
article_snippet.sent: Fortunately, courts have held that pretrial detainees like Freddie Gray are entitled to at least the same protection under the 14th Amendment as are convicted prisoners under the Eighth Amendment, and Freddie Gray prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishments," in this case the deliberate indifference to medical needs of prisoners.
article_snippet.sent: Other jurisdictions have actually opted to extend the protections of the Fourth Amendment after arrest, so not only could reasonable minds differ ... reasonable courts, judges, and states differ, too.
article_snippet.sent: That's a higher standard for liability than if Freddie Gray was hurt pre-arrest, so, if it's the truth, it just happens to also be a constitutionally convenient one.