Federal oversight of local police departments: consent decrees
Recently in this thread the topic of federal involvement in local police departments came up, and there are some points I want to add.
The main way this is done at present is through federal oversight. And it didn’t just start with the Obama administration; it’s been going on much longer than that. Just to take one example (the article is from this past January):
U.S. District Judge William Orrick said during a hearing Wednesday that the police department still has a ways to go to meet court-ordered reform goals, reported the East Bay Times.
“Despite what I know have been the good-faith efforts and hard work of the chief and of the command staff, there still remain important areas of noncompliance, and some of them seem to have straightforward fixes and they need to be fixed in order to reach substantial compliance,” Orrick said. “I’m frankly disappointed they haven’t been as of yet.”
Orrick said he believes the police department needs to complete Internal Affairs and use-of-force investigations more quickly and make sure that officers consistently activate their body cameras.
The hearing also included top police and city officials including Mayor Libby Schaaf, and the attorneys who filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against Oakland in 2000 after a group of Oakland police officers known as “The Riders” were accused of beating Black residents, planting drugs on them and falsifying records.
Oakland has been under federal oversight for decades, it turns out. It’s not alone, although it’s one of the longest cases. That process is a way for the federal camel to get its nose – and a large portion of its body – inside the local police tent (the article linked is from May of 2021):
After a four-year hiatus under President Donald Trump, the federal government will once again investigate local law enforcement agencies for systemic constitutional violations, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland announced last month. First in the queue are the police departments of Minneapolis and Louisville, Kentucky.
Both cities were at the heart of the Black Lives Matter protests last summer…
The federal investigations and possible court orders to follow could take years to complete. Local police departments under federal oversight complain about the immense strain on resources and personnel it takes to meet court-approved benchmarks for accountability, training and amended use-of-force policies. Community activists sometimes feel federal oversight does not do enough to fix systemic issues…
“I never once in my time there saw DOJ launch one of these investigations unless they had determined there was a long history [of abuses] and the agency has either been unable or unwilling to fix those problems,” said Christy Lopez, a former federal attorney who led the Department of Justice team that investigated the Ferguson Police Department after an officer shot and killed Michael Brown in 2014.
She also led federal investigations of local police in Chicago, Los Angeles and New Orleans, as well as in Newark, New Jersey, and Missoula, Montana.
“The government has a responsibility to protect people,” continued Lopez, who now co-leads Georgetown Law’s Program on Innovative Policing. “When you have state actors routinely violating people’s rights, of course you need a system for someone else to step in and protect those rights, vindicate those rights.”
Note the list of cities.
The practice begin as a result of a law passed by Congress in the wake of the Rodney King case:
Three years after the horrific beating of Rodney King by Los Angeles police officers, Congress enacted a law in 1994 that gave the Justice Department authority to investigate local police departments to see whether there is a “pattern or practice” of unconstitutionality or civil rights abuses.
The measure allowed the federal government to look beyond individual officers to root out systemic issues in local law enforcement agencies. The first investigation took place in 1997, examining the Pittsburgh Police Department.
The DOJ uses some sort of incident to claim systemic racism (or other problems I suppose, but my sense is that racism is the main one) and then to put the local police under a consent decree. These consent decrees last until the DOJ is satisfied – which can take a long long long time. Such a process is not uncommon, either:
Enforced by a judge and overseen by a court-approved monitor, consent decrees can take years to complete. The Oakland Police Department has been under a consent decree since 2003.
Over the past three decades, the Justice Department has conducted more than 70 investigations of local police departments. The Obama administration, for example, conducted 25 investigations and entered into 14 consent decrees.
And then there was Trump:
The investigations all but stopped when Trump was elected president. In 2018, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued an order limiting the Justice Department’s ability to investigate and oversee the nation’s 18,000 local police departments, saying it wasn’t the federal government’s responsibility to oversee local policing. He also said the probes hurt police morale.
The Trump administration did not enter into a single consent decree.
But that approach changed last month, when Garland rescinded Sessions’ order.
This is the way the feds establish control, or partial control, and/or the constant threat of control, over local police forces.
[NOTE: The entire article is well worth reading. Here’s another fascinating tidbit that gives you some of the flavor of the process and the people who are involved [emphasis mine]:
There can be tension between the police departments under investigation and the federal attorneys instructing them on what amounts to a constitutional violation, said Sharon Brett, one of the lead attorneys for the Obama administration’s investigation of the Chicago Police Department. She also worked on consent decrees for Cincinnati; Seattle; Ferguson, Missouri, and other cities.
When Brett would sit down with officers during the investigation, she recalled, the first question she would get is whether she had ever been a police officer or served in the military.
“There’s a sense among the rank-and-file that, you don’t know what I’m dealing with if you’ve never been here,” said Brett, who now is the legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas. “Law enforcement does not like people coming in who have no law enforcement experience and telling them how to do their job correctly.”
Now, why on earth would anyone resent that?]
The Rodney King incident is the granddaddy of all these fraudulent “cases” (Eric Garner, Michael Brown, George Floyd, and on and on). Here’s an excerpt from Dennis Prager’s chapter on it in his 1995 book Think A Second Time:
The Media and the Video
For over a year, Americans were shown again and again a frightening videotape of white police officers beating a black man. Indeed, the sight was so shocking that the president of the United States remarked on national television that he was surprised by the not-guilty verdict.
No one who saw the few seconds of the video that were repeatedly shown could imagine an acquittal of any of the officers involved.
But those who saw what the news media refused to show, or watched the entire trial, or understood that overly harsh charges were brought against the policemen, had a far fuller understanding of what happened, and why the jury reached its verdict. They saw a 230-pound, six-foot-three-inch man, with a 0.19 blood alcohol level (0.08 is legal intoxication), acting wildly and lunging at policemen, four of whom he actually threw off.
Those who saw this, or learned of it from the prosecution’s eyewitnesses, understood that the policemen suspected that King was under the influence of the hallucinogenic drug PCP. Like other PCP suspects, he could not be subdued by “tazing,” the shooting of powerful electric shocks. Even after being shot twice with the Taser gun, King still resisted being handcuffed. He also put his hands on his buttocks and made obscene gestures at a female officer who had ordered him to stay still.
Only after their verbal orders had been ignored and “tazing” and other techniques had failed to subdue him, did the police use their batons to beat King. And all this was after an eight-mile car chase at speeds up to one hundred miles an hour on a freeway, and eighty miles an hour through city streets.
It is almost impossible to overstate how responsible the media were for the rage over the Rodney King verdict. Los Angeles and national news programs deliberately and repeatedly showed only the most brutal seconds of the tape, thus never providing viewers with a context. It was as if all that Americans ever saw of the [post-trial] riots were pictures of Korean-Americans armed and shooting.
Yet when confronted with this prejudiced, inflammatory use of the Rodney King tape, Stephen Wasserman, the executive vice president of ABC News, dismissed the issue, saying, “The part of the tape not regularly shown does not shed light on the jury’s action, one way or the other.”
Fair-minded people of all political persuasions who have seen the full tape know that statement is false. Indeed, Roger Parloff, a Democratic attorney and senior journalist for American Lawyer concluded after viewing the entire tape that he “might have done the same thing the jury did.” He ended his article with these words: “I can’t remember a time when I have ever felt so hesitant to say what I believe … And I am terrified at the prospect of quotation out of context. After all, imagine if the media were to summarize my article the way it summarized the trial.”
Yet the New York Times and other leading newspapers, whenever discussing the incident, always referred to King as “the black motorist Rodney King,” as if white police were looking for an innocent black motorist to beat up.
Rodney King was anything but an innocent “black motorist.” In 1989, he was arrested for armed robbery and served nine months in state prison. He was a felon on parole when the chase occurred. He knew that, had he been caught, he would have been reincarcerated, which is why he drove at life-threatening speeds.
Had King been described even half the time as “the paroled armed robber who had just eluded police in a hundred-mile-per-hour car chase,” passions might not have been nearly as stirred up. Certainly, had news organizations shown more of the tape, the incident would never have engendered as much rage as it did.
The Police
None of this is to say that the police did no wrong. It seems obvious that excessive force was used. Indeed, the jury did not acquit Officer Laurence Powell, who administered nearly all the blows that struck Rodney King. Nevertheless, since the prosecution sought conviction on much more serious charges than excessive force, the jury was not prepared to register a guilty verdict that would have necessitated severe punishment.
In any event, the officers were punished. In addition to their legal fees, public humiliation, and personal and family tensions, the rookie officer involved was summarily dismissed from the police force, two of the three veterans were relieved of duty without pay and after a second trial were sent to jail. Compare their punishment with Rodney King’s nine months in prison for armed robbery.
(…)
The charge of racism made in the Rodney King incident may be true in some instances, but it was probably a smear in the case of at least one of the officers involved, Stacey Koon. A few months prior to the King beating, Officer Koon, to the amazement of onlookers, applied mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to a dying black transvestite prostitute who had open sores on his mouth. Why didn’t we hear about this on local and national newscasts?
Moreover, if racism, rather than Rodney King’s violent behavior, caused the police officers’ beating of him, why did the officers do virtually nothing to King’s two black companions who obeyed police instructions?
In 1994 the Dems ran both the House and Senate. Though the GOP could have mounted a filibuster to stop the legislation I suppose. Too much Rodney King heat perhaps.
The DOJ and FBI – with help from the CIA and NSA – have become the modern day, USA versions of the NKVD.
Paul Nachman:
I knew most of that because I’d read about the trial, but most of America has never learned it.
I also am pretty sure that the King case is the reason that police don’t ordinarily use batons anymore, which is in turn one of the reasons that the Minneapolis police department developed other recommended forms of restraint for resistant arrestees, which in turn is why Chauvin knelt with his knee on Floyd’s shoulder or neck.
The Rodney King case is a good example of why the DOJ has gone to all these “consent decrees.” The LAPD officers, especially Koon, saved King’s life as the female CHP officer who had pulled him over had her gun out about to shoot him for refusing to obey her instructions. Malanie Singer, the CHP officer, lied under oath when she testified against the cops twice, once on the criminal trial and once in the DOJ trial.
In that three-page memo dated March 4, 1991, Singer wrote in detail that King was beaten after he displayed violent behavior that included kicking and punching police officers.
Defense attorney Michael Stone produced the memo in court in an effort to contradict Singer’s testimony that Stone’s client, Officer Laurence M. Powell, used unnecessary and excessive force in repeatedly striking King with his baton.
She lied and then retired on stress disability.
The leftist lobby has tied police departments in knots with these judge rulings. The best example of the judge rulings that legislate I know is the Kansas City school decree, in which a judge took over the school district budget and the city’s property taxes to try to desegregate the schools. It ended up with Olympic swimming pools in some schools and outlandish rulings.
“Local police departments under federal oversight complain about the immense strain on resources and personnel it takes to meet court-approved benchmarks for accountability, training and amended use-of-force policies.”
Defunding the police ensures that “court-approved benchmarks for accountability, training and amended use-of-force policies” will be unlikely to be met.
Media sensationalist and seditionist propaganda massages the narrative of a systemically racist America, ensuring that the public’s perception of no progress being made on racist ‘white’ police continues.
Result; increased calls for the federalization of the nation’s police.
“The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.”
We ask police to deal with violent felons who often resist arrets. When the police use the force necessary to subdue them, and some bystander videos it, there is outrage – but only if the suspect is black. It beggars the imagination that people who need protection by the police turn on them when they see a video of such violence. The video is usually only a smidgen of the info about that particular incident.
Seattle presently has a U.S. attorney, Nicholas Brown, who has declared that his mission in life is m to prioritize less harsh sentencing and punishment – and more creative ways to fight crime. What a putz! He was in the military, but only the JAG. He has never worked as a cop. Just what Seattle needs – a U.S. attorney who is soft-headed about crime.
Seattle’s police department was under federal supervision for many years, which ended in 2020. Just in time for the city council to defund the police because of the George Floyd incident. Since then, Seattle has slipped into a hellscape of crime, vandalism, and rampant homeless camps. In spite of paying $25,000 hiring bonuses, the department is badly undermanned and admits it cannot respond to many 9/11 calls in a timely manner. The result? Businesses are closing, cops are resigning, and residents are moving to nearby counties where policing is still actually protecting the people. Do you think the Guv, Jayn Inslee, cares? Or the city council? Nope, they’re all Democrats.
The baton was always a useful tool in capable hands. Most perps, even when under the influence of drugs, can be brought to heal without killing them. Yes, they may have aa bad bruise or two or even a fracture, but those injuries heal. The perp survives and goes to jail, while the officer goes home to his family uninjured.
The primary incidents that become “police brutality” cases are when suspects resist arrest. Why is there no campaign to notify the public (and perps in particular) that if you resist arrest, the police are authorized to use whatever force is necessary to make the arrest successfully. And, that resisting arrest may lead to bodily harm up to and including death. The government has run a major public information campaign about Covid and vaccines. Why can’t they run one about resisting arrest? We all know the answer to that one. Society can’t handle that truth.
Related to J.J.’s above comment on Seattle and the destruction of the police force and the city.
‘The Fall Of Seattle’
https://unherd.com/2022/03/the-fall-of-seattle/
“Law enforcement does not like people coming in who have no law enforcement experience and telling them how to do their job correctly.”
The buffoons who inflict their impractical fantasies on the police have only one thought in mind – that crooks are poor misunderstood children having mere tantrums that any playground director could subdue with some loving words. Said buffoons have no business pretending to represent the public, whom the police are here to defend at the risk of their lives.
Backdoor federalizing has been going on since at least the 55mph mandate. Speed limits are a state matter, but federal funding went away for the non-compliant.
Pingback:If All You See... - Pirate's Cove » Pirate's Cove
Re. The Oakland case that led to the federal involvement.
The 5 officers who allegedly did the bad things were charged by the local district attorney. One fled before the trial, never to be seen again (all were dismissed from the department by then). Of the four who went to trial, one was acquitted and the remaining ones hung the jury (in favor of acquittal). At least 2 more refilings of the charges followed, all without a conviction. After two or three bites at that apple the DA announced no further attempts would occur. So… none of the accused officers were found guilty of any crime.
Yet the City Attorney agreed to the federal oversight (consent decree) and the oversight remains in place today, costing the city some $1Mil per year.
}}} “… coming in who have no law enforcement experience and telling them how to do their job correctly.”
Pretty sure if you have no experience, then you are not someone who can possibly understand how to do the job “correctly”.
Would you hire someone to do surgery who had studied the matter for decades, but never actually performed surgery?
Would you hire an engineer to build a building who had studied it and taught it for decades, but had never actually build an outhouse?
The mental incompetence and the hubris is glaringly obvious. :-/
}}} The government has run a major public information campaign about Covid and vaccines. Why can’t they run one about resisting arrest? We all know the answer to that one. Society can’t handle that truth.
The public can handle the truth. They need to stop listening to jackass liberals pandering to the thug types telling them they should be handled like arrant children and not violent thugs.
When a cop is in your face looking to subdue you, you don’t fight him. PERIOD.
It’s not that hard to fucking do. Yes, you can still get fucked after that, but one way to guarantee you get fucked is to resist further.
}}} The DOJ and FBI – with help from the CIA and NSA – have become the modern day, USA versions of the NKVD.
Ah, when you speak of such alphabet agencies, never forget the one that affects most people, the state-level CPS — “Child Protective Services”.
I more than amply grant, protecting children is important, but a lot of these actions are just way over the top BS.
Pingback:The feds get their hands on the Minneapolis police department and - guess what? - find it racist - The New Neo