In the case of City and County of San Francisco, California v. Sheehan (2014), the U.S. Supreme Court was asked to consider whether police officers were required by law to accommodate a person with mental illness when arresting them under potentially dangerous circumstances. The case arose after two San Francisco police officers entered Teresa Sheehan's room in a group home for people with mental disabilities without a warrant, leading to an altercation where they shot her multiple times. She sued the city and county of San Francisco as well as the individual officers involved, alleging violations of her Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure along with violation of Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). However, in its decision, the court did not address these issues directly due to procedural reasons but ruled that there was no clear precedent at that time which would have alerted those specific officers that their conduct was unconstitutional.

In the dissenting opinion for City and County of San Francisco, California v. Sheehan, Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by Justice Elena Kagan, argued that the court should not have decided on a question that was not presented in the petition for certiorari or briefed before them. They believed it was inappropriate to decide whether police officers were entitled to qualified immunity when they forced entry into Teresa Sheehan's room without a warrant under circumstances where she posed an immediate threat to herself or others due to her mental illness. The justices felt this issue had been abandoned by San Francisco during litigation and thus should not be considered by the Supreme Court. Furthermore, they criticized their colleagues' decision as being based on an incomplete factual record and lacking in legal analysis.