The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals is reconsidering a police excessive force case after the Supreme Court vacated its previous ruling and ordered a fresh review in light of recent precedent.
The case involves Ethan Daniel Marks, who was 19 years old when Minneapolis Police Officer Benjamin Bauer shot him with a chemical-filled projectile from approximately five to 10 feet away. The incident left Marks with devastating injuries, including a ruptured eyeball, a fractured eye socket, and a traumatic brain injury.
Marks filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Officer Bauer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The lawsuit specifically claims excessive force in the officer's use of the chemical projectile during the encounter.
The case has already traveled through multiple levels of the federal court system. Initially, the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota denied Officer Bauer's motion for summary judgment on the excessive force claim. The district court found that genuine issues of material fact existed that precluded granting qualified immunity to the officer.
Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that protects government officials from civil lawsuits unless they violated clearly established constitutional rights. Officers seeking qualified immunity must demonstrate that their conduct did not violate constitutional rights or that the rights were not clearly established at the time of the incident.
The Eighth Circuit initially affirmed the district court's decision in 2024, ruling in *Marks v. Bauer*, 107 F.4th 840 (8th Cir. 2024). The appeals court agreed that factual disputes prevented the officer from receiving qualified immunity protection at the summary judgment stage.
However, the case took a new turn when the Supreme Court intervened. The high court vacated the Eighth Circuit's judgment and remanded the case "for further consideration in light of Barnes v. Felix," 605 U.S. 73, 145 S. Ct. 1353.
The *Barnes v. Felix* decision represents recent Supreme Court guidance on qualified immunity analysis in excessive force cases. While the full implications of how *Barnes* should affect the *Marks* case remain to be determined, the Supreme Court's remand suggests that the new precedent may alter the legal framework for evaluating the officer's conduct.
The current appeal shows Officer Bauer in his individual capacity challenging the district court's refusal to grant him qualified immunity. The officer's legal team is arguing that his actions were reasonable under the circumstances and that he should be protected from the civil lawsuit.
From Marks' perspective, the severe nature of his injuries forms a central part of his excessive force claim. A ruptured eyeball, fractured eye socket, and traumatic brain injury represent significant and permanent harm that occurred when the officer discharged the chemical projectile at close range.
The case highlights ongoing national debates about police use of force, particularly involving chemical projectiles and other less-lethal weapons. These devices, while designed as alternatives to firearms, can still cause serious injuries when used improperly or at inappropriate distances.
The factual circumstances surrounding the initial encounter between Marks and Officer Bauer will be crucial to the court's analysis. The appeals court must determine whether the officer's use of force was objectively reasonable under the specific circumstances he faced, considering factors such as the severity of the crime, whether the suspect posed an immediate threat, and whether the suspect was actively resisting arrest or attempting to flee.
The close range of the projectile discharge—between five and 10 feet—may be particularly relevant to the excessive force analysis. Courts often scrutinize the distance and circumstances under which officers deploy less-lethal weapons, as these factors can affect both the reasonableness of the force used and the severity of resulting injuries.
The Eighth Circuit's reconsideration comes at a time when federal courts are grappling with how to apply qualified immunity doctrine in police misconduct cases. The Supreme Court has provided various guidance over the years, but each case presents unique factual scenarios that require careful analysis.
The court filing shows the case was submitted on July 7, 2025, and filed on Feb. 12, 2026, indicating the appeals court is actively working through its reconsideration following the Supreme Court's remand.
The outcome of this case could have implications beyond the immediate parties, potentially providing guidance for other excessive force cases involving chemical projectiles and close-range deployments of less-lethal weapons. The Eighth Circuit's analysis of how *Barnes v. Felix* applies to these specific circumstances may influence future qualified immunity determinations in similar cases.
As the court works through its reconsideration, both parties await a decision that will determine whether Officer Bauer receives qualified immunity protection or whether Marks' excessive force claim can proceed to trial on the merits.