This is... not exactly right.

To start, like w the rape case, Barrett didn't write this. Manion did (like, strangely, in the rape case).

Second, it doesn't say this. It's about handcuffs--bc it's a qualified immunity case, which are always ugly cases about minor details. https://twitter.com/TheRoot/status/1318921358181543937

The q is whether putting on handcuffs too tightly, which apparently led to Day's death, was a clear violation of established law at the time.

The op then goes out of its way to say no. It's ugly. But it's ugly bc the LAW of QI is ugly. By QI standards, looks like a routine op.

Again, I'm no defender of Barrett at all.

But this is a second time she's been criticized for an opinion she didn't write in ways that get the fundamental nature of the opinion wrong.

In both cases, it's the LAW, not Barrett, that's the problem.