Case in point on qualified immunity is not an absolute...someone just posted this case.
I just read the decision. The case wasn't about qualified immunity. Quite the opposite, the government argued that the "anti-SLAPP" statute, which was intended to prevent frivolous lawsuits against private citizens for protected free speech applied to lies and misrepresentations made by government employees in open court and in court ordered negotiations with the plaintiff's. And they won.
The takeaway from that is that the guy's guns are gone, he was denied legal recourse to receive compensation for them, and he has a $9,000 bill for the city's attorney fees. All because his lawsuit was deemed "frivolous" and infringed on the government's right to free speech under a statute that I would bet a million dollars was never intended to be used this way (who even thinks the government has rights since it's not a person?).