Passengers in Terence Crawford Traffic Stop Secure First-Step Victory as Core Federal Civil Rights Claims Move Forward

Passengers in the Terence “Bud” Crawford traffic stop have secured an important first-step victory in federal court, as the core federal civil rights claims against the City of Omaha and the individually named Omaha police officers continue forward following the Court’s recent order.

The case, brought by the Plaintiffs, challenges what they allege was an unconstitutional escalation of a traffic stop after lawful firearm disclosure. The lawsuit is part of a broader fight against the reality of driving while Black, where ordinary traffic encounters can quickly become dangerous, humiliating, and unconstitutional.

The Claims Moving Forward

1. Excessive force claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against individually named Omaha police officers for allegedly pointing firearms at the Plaintiffs, ordering them out of the vehicle at gunpoint, handcuffing them, and detaining them despite no allegation that the Plaintiffs threatened officers, resisted commands, or engaged in criminal conduct.
2. Failure-to-intervene claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against individually named officers who allegedly failed to stop or prevent the unconstitutional use of force and detention.
3. Municipal liability claims against the City of Omaha alleging that the City maintained an unconstitutional policy, practice, or custom of deploying firearms against people who lawfully disclose that they are carrying a weapon.
4. Failure-to-train and failure-to-supervise claims against the City of Omaha alleging that the City failed to adequately train and supervise officers regarding the constitutional limits of dealing with lawfully armed citizens.

The case arises from a September 2025 traffic stop involving the vehicle of boxing champion Terence “Bud” Crawford. According to the Complaint, occupants of the vehicle informed officers that lawful firearms were present. Within seconds, officers allegedly drew their weapons, ordered everyone out of the vehicle at gunpoint, handcuffed the occupants, and detained them for approximately thirty minutes. The firearms were later confirmed to be lawful, and the occupants were legally permitted to possess them.

The Court has ordered defendants to answer the remaining claims by July 8, 2026.

Record Corrected

Attorney Muhammad Responds to Media Misinformation

“Now let me address something directly, because I will not let a botched headline rewrite the record on my clients’ case,” said Attorney Hakeem Muhammad, counsel for the Plaintiffs. “Reports circulating - including from First Alert 8 - claiming that officers were ‘dismissed from the case’ are flatly wrong. Not imprecise. Wrong.”

None of the officers have been dismissed from this case. That report is incorrect.

Only the official capacity claims against them were dismissed - every officer remains a defendant, and the excessive force and failure-to-intervene claims against them, personally, are still alive. The Court has ordered them to answer those claims by July 8th.

“This case is about more than one traffic stop,” Muhammad added. “It is about whether Black passengers can be treated as presumptively dangerous during a traffic stop even when they are complying with officers and lawfully disclosing firearm possession. It is about driving while Black, policing, and whether lawful conduct can be used as an excuse for unconstitutional escalation. That fight is not over. It is only getting started.”

Looking Ahead

The Plaintiffs now move forward to the next phase of litigation and remain committed to pursuing accountability, transparency, and constitutional protections for law-abiding citizens who encounter law enforcement while lawfully exercising their rights.