TexasCHLforum.com

There is a limit where a LEO acts beyond the scope and entitlement of their job and cease to have the backing of the badge and government.

Let me use some reductio ad absurdem reasoning to take this ruling to its logical conclusion with three shocking scenarios that are only different from the story cited by the OP as a matter of degree:
- Can you resist a cop sexually assaulting your wife / mother / daughter?
- Can you resist a cop who is robbing you?
- Can you resist a cop who is attempting to murder you?
. . . in each of these situations, would the court recommend that we allow the rape / robbery / murder to be completed and simply seek legal remedy after the fact?

The naysayers will try to argue that the illegal search of your house or person is categorically different and results in no irreparable harm, but I disagree. Protection from unlawful search and seizure, namely the right to be secure in one's home, person, and possessions, are basic rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights that can only be abridged through due process of law.

Cops can go bad, even though it's rare. They can go bad while in uniform. They are human beings that are staffed from the general population. When they do, they act beyond the authority of their position and no longer act as an agent of the government. A law enforcement officer illegally entering my home is indiscernible from any other actor intending ill will or harm for me or my family.

The cards are definitely stacked against any person who ever needs to use force to protect themselves from a law enforcement officer gone bad. Proving the circumstances of the situation will be a terrible uphill battle and might be impossible because we typically give all the initial weight to the testimony of the badge bearer (rightfully so in most cases).