If no absolute immunity protection exists, which type of immunity is being referred to?

Qualified immunity is the concept being referred to when no absolute immunity protection exists. This legal doctrine protects government officials, including law enforcement officers, from liability for civil damages as long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. It serves as a middle ground, allowing officials to perform their duties without fear of personal liability, yet holding them accountable for actions that breach established laws or rights.

In contrast to absolute immunity, which provides full protection usually reserved for high-ranking officials performing official duties, qualified immunity requires a two-part analysis assessing whether the law was clearly established and whether the officer's actions were objectively reasonable in the context of that law. This nuanced protection aims to balance the interests of enforcing the law and protecting individual rights in a reasonable manner.

The other types of immunity mentioned do not have the same legal standing or context in relation to the protections afforded to law enforcement officers in civil cases. Civil immunity typically might refer more broadly to protections from civil suits, but it does not carry the specific legal framework that qualified immunity does. Departmental immunity usually pertains to organizations, not individuals, and statutory immunity is limited to specific statutes that grant immunity under particular circumstances. Therefore, qualified immunity is the correct concept in the