It was the year 1900 and SCOTUS held that if the police tried to arrest you without a warrant you could violently resist.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13577773471272070940&q=%22177+U.S.+529%22&hl=en&as_sdt=2006

It was the year 2011, and an Indiana court holds that you can't resist an unlawful arrest because:
"We believe however that a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.

Nowadays, an. . . arrestee has means unavailable at common law for redress against unlawful police action." The court says at common law, there were particular dangers of arrest that don't occur now - wait till you hear what they are:

If you were arrested during the bad common law times you might face -- indefinite detention, lack of bail, disease-infested prisons, physical torture — THANK GOD WE FIXED THAT!

And we don't need to resist anymore because if we are arrested we get: (1) bail, (2) prompt arraignment and determination of probable cause, (3) the exclusionary rule, (4) police department internal review and disciplinary procedure, and (5) civil remedies).

The devolution of our criminal justice system is really something to behold. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15168567141254757924&q=%22177+U.S.+529%22&hl=en&as_sdt=2006

In response to these rulings, a lot of states have developed "stand your ground" laws (which almost always give police immunity.) We know who those laws are used against, right?

Instead of recognizing a legitimate use of force to resist unlawful entries into people's homes by police officers, we now get to kill whomever at any point in time if we think it is necessary. Awesome work guys.