Well, it's more complicated than that under federal law. If there is no completely specific SCOTUS ruling on the issue then it comes down to whether there is a published opinion by the Circuit Court in the government official's area. If there is, then they are expected to have read it and taken it into account when they acted. If they violate that opinion then they are liable.
You can only be civil liable for these sorts of violations. I think to criminally liable under a constitutional violation you need an act of violence? e.g. like the Floyd case?
Sure, you're talking about legally what is, due to the concepts of sovereign immunity and more specifically qualified immunity. My point is that the concept of sovereign immunity itself needs to be drastically curtailed (to the point that qualified immunity would be moot).
You can only be civil liable for these sorts of violations. I think to criminally liable under a constitutional violation you need an act of violence? e.g. like the Floyd case?