Explain the underlying assumption when it comes to police officers getting held individually liable for actions they take on duty

Based on the video lecture, your group discussion, and the attached cases, please explain the following:Explain the underlying assumption when it comes to police officers getting held individually liable for actions they take on dutyWhat situations/circumstances change that assumption? In other words, what would an individual have to show in order to sue an officer?In this section, outline the requirements of Section 1983 lawsuits and use at least two cases as references.Provide me with your opinion of suing police officers. Questions to guide you here are (meaning you DO NOT have to answer each one):What do you agree and disagree with?How do you think it should be changed?What should the requirements be in order to sue an officer?Should they have any level of immunity?This essay should be a minimum of 4 double-spaced pages, Times New Roman size 12 font, and include at least three references. It should also be free of spelling and other grammar and mechanical errors. Mechanics will be awarded 10 points.Court cases (in chronological order):Harlow v. Fitzgerald_ 457 U.S. 800 (1).PDF Download Harlow v. Fitzgerald_ 457 U.S. 800 (1).PDFAnderson v. Creighton_ 483 U.S. 635.PDF Download Anderson v. Creighton_ 483 U.S. 635.PDFMalley v. Briggs_ 475 U.S. 335.PDF Download Malley v. Briggs_ 475 U.S. 335.PDFSaucier v. Katz_ 533 U.S. 194.PDF Download Saucier v. Katz_ 533 U.S. 194.PDFGroh v. Ramirez_ 540 U.S. 551.PDF Download Groh v. Ramirez_ 540 U.S. 551.PDFMesserschmidt v. Millender_ 565 U.S. 535.PDF Download Messerschmidt v. Millender_ 565 U.S. 535.PDFKisela v. Hughes_ 138 S. Ct. 1148.PDF Download Kisela v. Hughes_ 138 S. Ct. 1148.PDFFor some example citations (that you may copy/paste), see this document: CJ 3020 Citations.docx