LOS ANGELES—A national pro-police organization has filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, urging the high court to overturn an appellate decision that reversed a ruling shielding a Los Angeles police officer from liability in a fatal shooting, it was announced Dec. 4.

The brief filed by the National Police Association asks the court to reaffirm decisions made by now-retired Los Angeles Police Department Officer Toni McBride in April 2020 when she fired her weapon to subdue a knife-wielding assailant—the final shots fired while the suspect was rolling on the ground, court papers show.

A Los Angeles County investigation deemed the shooting justified, as did a federal judge and a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, but in a sharply divided 6–5 vote, a review by a full panel of the 9th Circuit upended that outcome.

“Police officers cannot effectively maintain control of violent offenders on the nation’s streets, and prevent further injury to the public if their only option is to retreat,” NPA attorney James Buchal said in a statement, alleging that stripping officers of decisive authority would create an unreasonable risk to the lives of police officers and the public.

McBride, who was granted medical retirement from the police department last year, killed Daniel Hernandez after he was in a car crash in South Los Angeles.

Documents show the shooting occurred as Hernandez, 38, advanced on McBride and her partner while holding a box cutter, ignoring commands to drop the weapon. McBride fired six shots over six seconds to subdue the suspect. The final two shots were fired while Hernandez was rolling on the ground, still clutching the blade, McBride’s attorneys said.

Attorneys for the Hernandez family argued in a lawsuit that the shots violated the suspect’s civil rights.

The shooting was ultimately found to be “in policy” under the police department’s standards.

Last March, a three-judge panel from the 9th Circuit ruled that even though a jury could have reasonably found McBride used excessive force, she could not be sued in federal court due to qualified immunity, a legal principle that protects officers from liability over some on-duty actions.

The Hernandez family challenged the decision, leading to the reversal in May by the larger en banc panel of the appellate court.