Immunity of the State, Prosecutors, and Judges
Published .
The general concept
“Government immunity” is not one blanket defense. The State, an individual State employee, a prosecutor, and a judge may rely on different rules. A claimant must identify who acted, in what capacity, what kind of conduct is challenged, and whether Maryland has waived immunity for that claim.
How Maryland applies it
The Maryland Tort Claims Act waives the State’s immunity for specified tort claims, subject to statutory conditions, limits, and exceptions. State personnel generally receive individual immunity for torts within the scope of their public duties when they act without malice or gross negligence and the State has waived immunity for the claim. Prosecutors have absolute immunity for conduct closely associated with their role in the judicial process, such as filing charges and presenting the State’s case; that protection does not automatically cover every investigative or administrative act. Judges generally have absolute immunity from damages for judicial acts within their jurisdiction, even when the act is alleged to be erroneous. Whether conduct was judicial and whether the court had jurisdiction are central questions. Immunity rules do not necessarily bar prospective or other forms of relief, and statutory notice and filing requirements can independently affect a claim.
Related Maryland Cases and Authorities
Md. Code, State Government §§ 12-101 et seq.; Md. Code, Courts & Judicial Proceedings § 5-522; Rovin v. State, 472 Md. 529 (2021); Parker v. State, 337 Md. 271 (1995); Gill v. Ripley, 352 Md. 754 (1999).