[fblike]
Since the shooting of eighteen-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri last August there have been growing calls for reforming police tactics in the United States. Liberal and libertarian groups charge that American police have become “militarized” and much too aggressive. These groups note that in addition to Brown, other unarmed suspects have died after interactions with police officials such as Freddie Gray in Baltimore and Eric Garner in New York City. Protests that emerged from the deaths of these men and others sometimes degenerated into violence with Ferguson and Baltimore experiencing riots this season, thereby creating some of the worst civil unrest that America has seen since the late 1960s. President Barack Obama and the Justice Department have investigated local police forces more diligently over the last six years and such investigations are likely to continue as an estimated 500 Americans have been killed by police officers this year. Proponents of reform argue that police need to do a better job interacting with the communities they serve and that better training is needed for officers when they interact with young people, the mentally ill, and minority groups. Opponents argue that an emphasis on community policing will create the re-emergence of a national crime wave, with some noting that a “Ferguson effect” is taking place where criminals are more empowered than ever before as police hold back for fear of criminal prosecution if they make a mistake.
This topic brief will explain the reasons given for police reforms, highlight some of the reforms that are ongoing in police departments throughout the country, and then analyze the impediments that exist to reform.
Readers are also encouraged to use the links below and in the related R&D to bolster their files about this topic.
The Impetus for Police Reform
After domestic upheavals linked to poverty, racial injustice, and police brutality in the late 1960s, a political effort grew to create a stronger “law and order” apparatus in the United States. Richard Nixon campaigned on a “law and order” platform in the 1968 presidential election, alleging that permissive social welfare programs were responsible for the riots that devastated cities such as Newark, Watts, and Detroit under President Lyndon B. Johnson. Conservative politicians continued to warn about crime for the remainder of the twentieth century, arguing that the breakdown of social values and the African-American family were to blame for rising problems in America’s inner cities. In contrast, liberal voices insisted that more equal economic and educational opportunities were needed as there was a feeling of alienation among the urban poor and racial minorities. Nevertheless, American voters cast their lot with conservative candidates more times than not, thereby laying the foundation for the “war on drugs” during the 1980s, and producing the rise of more aggressive police tactics. The template for a tough policing approach was New York City, which The New York Post explains on June 9 saw an average of thirty-seven murders and 100 shootings per week in 1993. New York City’s crime problems led to the election of federal attorney Rudy Giuliani in November of that year and in 1994 Giuliani hired William Bratton to crackdown on crime. The New York City Police Department (NYPD) followed the “broken windows theory” of policing that claimed that aggressively cracking down on small crimes such as loitering or jaywalking could prevent larger, more dangerous crimes because it sent the signal to criminals that police were active. Police also engaged in the use of “stop and frisk” tactics where police stopped individuals they suspected of being involved in a crime. Under Giuliani’s tenure, New York City’s crime rate fell, which mirrored a pattern that was seen in the rest of the country. However, the falling crime rate came at a cost as the city’s minority groups, especially African Americans, alleged that they were victims of racial profiling by police and civil libertarians warned of police shooting unarmed suspects. The most reported case of police officers killing an unarmed suspect took place in February 1999 when Amadou Diallo, an immigrant from Guinea, was shot forty-one times by four police officers, all of whom were later acquitted of second-degree murder charges.
Despite the problems, New York City became a test case for how aggressive police methods worked and other urban police departments began mirroring some of its policies. Unfortunately, aggressive policies have tended to provoke aggressive reactions from suspects. Aggressive tactics also strained relations between police and communities, especially those populated by the poor or minority groups. In places such as Ferguson, Missouri, a city where most residents are African American, the police force was largely composed of white officers, so this created tensions between the two sides instead of an atmosphere of mutual cooperation to root out criminal elements. Such misunderstandings explain how violence erupted after the death of Michael Brown as the community had little faith in local police to handle an investigation into Brown’s death impartially. The community is still angry that the officer that shot him was not tried although Attorney General Eric Holder admitted that evidence did not warrant charges. Civil libertarians explain that police have been too willing to use deadly force as a first, rather than last, resort and that their disregard for the rights of suspects is what led to the death of Freddie Gray after he was arrested by Baltimore police officers this past April. Similarly, two Cleveland police officers, according to USA Today on June 11, could face criminal charges for their quick decision to use deadly force against twelve-year-old Tamir Rice last November. Rice was holding a nonlethal pellet gun near a city recreation center when two police officials were called to the scene and they reportedly used deadly force less than two seconds into the encounter. USA Today writes on June 10 that at least 500 people have been killed in fatal police shootings this year, thereby providing evidence for those who wish to rollback elements of aggressive police work.
These fears of escalating police power were reinforced in Ferguson, Missouri when protesters faced off with police that were equipped with surplus military vehicles and equipment. The 1033 Program, created in 1997, allows local police agencies to receive billions of dollars in military hardware from federal authorities. The program has enabled police to receive ammunition, medical supplies, clothing, grenade launchers, and armored vehicles. Republican Senator and 2016 presidential candidate Rand Paul of Kentucky was critical of the deployment of these resources against protesters in Ferguson, warning that local police were becoming “militarized” and seeing the people that they served as enemies instead of common citizens. The Washington Times writes on June 10 that when federal authorities invested the Cleveland Police Department they found that one police district had a sign that read “forward operation base,” which is a military term for projecting force into an enemy area. Last month, President Barack Obama moved to limit purchases under the 1033 Program, with police forces now prohibited from obtaining camouflage uniforms, bayonets, firearms and ammunition that is more than .50 caliber, grenade launchers, weaponized aircraft, and tank-like armored vehicles (although critics note that police can still purchase these goods from private sellers if they want them). It is hoped that by reducing the allocation of military-style weaponry to police that a mindset change will take place within local police departments and that they will be less likely to view themselves as quasi-paramilitary forces.
Another reason for police reform is what some critics call a general lack of accountability within law enforcement. The USA Today article from June 10 explains that law enforcement agencies are not required by the federal government to report how many people are the victims of fatal police shootings. As a result, no one knows where more fatal police shootings take place, who is most affected by these shootings, and exactly how many of these shootings take place within a given calendar year. USA Today notes that The Washington Post and The Guardian estimate that at least 2.6 people per day have been killed in police shootings in the first five months of 2015, which is above the 1.1 people per day figure that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has reported based on the voluntary data it has obtained from local officials. In addition, evidence of police misconduct has emerged largely from the videotaping of their actions by private citizens. This was the case of Rodney King, who was beaten by Los Angeles police officers in March 1991, and most recently in the case of Walter Scott, who was shot by a Michael Slager, a police officer, in North Charleston on April 4. The Christian Science Monitor notes on June 9 that video showed Scott and Slager briefly scuffling before Scott tried to flee and was shot. Advocates for police reform suggest that police-suspect interactions should be taped at all times which will provide greater transparency and oversight.
Ongoing Reforms
Arguably the most widespread police reform that is currently being debated by state legislators is mandating that police wear body cameras. This is supposed to prevent situations such as Ferguson, Missouri where there was conflicting testimony on what really happened between Michael Brown and police officer Darren Wilson. Vox explains on May 28 that body cameras are the most objective record that is available when there are allegations of excessive force and police brutality. Although some officers have objected to being taped, proponents of the laws argue that officers are public servants and enjoy no special expectation of privacy. Vox further explains that cameras can help root out the 15% of police that abuse their power and authority, which can have the effect of corrupting other officers that are caught in the middle of participating in proper actions and excessively using their authority. The Huffington Post reports on June 3 that the federal government is trying to assist local police in paying for body cameras with the House of Representatives recently voting to strip $10 million from the Drug Enforcement Agency’s (DEA) budget to pay for the Department of Justice’s body camera program. This program carries a total price tag of $25 million. Government Technology Magazine explains on June 1 that prior to 2015 only four states had body camera laws, but as of law month thirty-four states are now considering legislation to do so. The most recent state to approve a law was Maryland, where Republicans and Democrats agreed on establishing guidelines for the use of body cameras. Former Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has also called for federal legislation that would mandate that all police forces wear body cameras (such legislation would theoretically tie this reform to local police receiving federal funding).
Another reform is trying to deal with the problem of not having adequate data on deadly police-suspect interactions. As noted earlier, existing federal law does not mandate that local police agencies report the number of those killed by police each year to the FBI. The Guardian reports on June 6 that Democrats have been the primary leaders of these reform efforts with Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Cory Booker (D-NJ) co-authoring the Police Reporting of Information, Data, and Evidence (PRIDE) Act. This would make it mandatory for local officials to report police-involved fatalities and provide a demographic breakdown of the data by age, gender, and race. For its part, the House is looking at legislation called the National Statistics on Deadly Force Transparency Act. This would demand that any police-involved fatalities be investigated and allow for an independent investigation to avoid conflicts of interest. Its main sponsor is Steve Cohen (D-TN) and he has floated the idea that if local police refused to follow the law then they would lose their federal funding (Boxer’s bill is not tied to any federal funding requirement). Reformers believe that if the FBI gets accurate data on police killings that this will provide a better indication of where such deadly interactions are taking place and this could be used as evidence for Justice Department investigations into those police forces.
And how would the Justice Department do this? The preferred method is through consent decrees, which are agreements that are used between two parties to solve a dispute. Think of a consent decree as a binding agreement that is supervised by a judge and that is legally enforceable. Both sides negotiate the terms of the consent decree and it is a way for both of them to avoid a costly legal battle. It also can shield both sides from legal liability since neither one admits guilty. In 1994, Congress passed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act that empowered the Justice Department to engage in consent decrees with communities that were found to have widespread police abuses. While President George W. Bush’s Department of Justice did not reach many consent decrees with police departments, President Obama’s has reached sixteen and the DOJ is investigating several more. The most recent city to reach a settlement with the Justice Department is Cleveland. The Washington Times article previously cited explains that an eighteen-month Justice Department investigation found that Cleveland police used excessive force and that officers patrolled in a way that “instilled distrust and a lack of respect for others.” The decree mandates that Cleveland’s police move to a community policing model, institute overhauls to their deadly force protocol, provide better treatment to mentally ill suspects, and enact transparency reforms. The Christian Science Monitor writes on May 28 that consent decrees have mixed results. For example, Cincinnati’s police force saw a significant decline in the use of deadly force after its six-year consent decree ended in 2007. The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) also saw a reduction of cases of misconduct after its twelve-year consent decree expired. However, a consent decree instituted in Pittsburgh in 1997 did not produce sizable results, which some experts say may have been due to the fact that a reformist police chief was removed and a corrupt one replaced him. It should be noted that communities can request a DOJ investigation at any time in an effort to overhaul their police forces, so consent decrees are not the first option for the DOJ in fixing police practices. Cities such as Philadelphia; Las Vegas; and Washington, D.C. have requested such investigations in the past.
The Obama administration has made it a point to local law enforcement officials that it wants to see a shift to community policing whereby police work with community officials and other stakeholders to devise effective strategies for dealing with crime. Time writes on May 18 that the President has hailed Camden, New Jersey, a suburb of Philadelphia, as a model of police reform as the city overhauled its city-police force for a county model in 2012. The new force hired more officers and put them on the street to interact with locals. The city is working to portray officers more as role models than aggressive enforcers of existing laws. Early evidence suggests that Camden’s model has worked as the city’s homicide rate has fallen 40% over the last two years. However, there are some critics of the Camden approach. Civil liberties groups say that minor infractions are being dealt with too harshly and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) is worried that the new police force does not have strong union protections. Still, the preferred reformist model for law enforcement is for officers to have positive, daily interactions with their communities so that the distrust that fueled the riots in Ferguson and Baltimore can be averted.
Obstacles to Reform
This topic brief thus far has been heavily slanted toward the reformist ethos of changing police tactics, but there is another side that is making some valid arguments for why the current drive toward reforming police could endanger society or hinder local law enforcement agencies. For example, the body camera mandate seems sensible on face, but there are several procedural issues that must also be settled. The Sacramento Bee reports on June 6 that California law enforcement lobbyists are railing against efforts to mandate body cameras, arguing that law enforcement personnel should be allowed to view the videotape of their interaction with a suspect before filing a report. Government Technology Magazine adds that there are questions about how much the equipment will cost, how it will be stored, how long footage will be retained by departments, and how much access public citizens should have to footage. Surveys suggest that 40% of local police say that the reason that they have not adopted body camera technology is due to cost, so if a federal or state mandate is passed someone is going to have to pay for this technology. Since state budgets are not in the best of shape, this could produce tax increases at the federal, state, or local level, especially if the DOJ’s body camera pilot program becomes larger. Others suggest that body cameras are not a panacea for police brutality, with The New Yorker noting on May 12 that Eric Garner’s death in New York was videotaped and was not conclusive as to whether or not police were solely at fault.
Police also allege that media reporting of police-related fatalities has been too one-sided and that independent actors are trying to make a name for themselves at the expense of regular officers. The Christian Science Monitor writes on June 10 that the Los Angeles Police Protective League criticized a recent decision by the Los Angeles Police Commission that officer Sharlton Wampler wrongly approached and stopped a twenty-five-year-old black man named Ezell Ford last year, an encounter that produced a fatal shooting. The Protective League explains that Wampler was defending himself and that Ford’s DNA was found on his holster, but the Commission found that Wampler engaged in actions that produced the confrontation. In response, the Protective League and other police officials have claimed that the Commission was caving into public pressure and that its actions were “political and self-serving.” These same criticisms have been leveled against State Prosecutor Marilyn Mosby over the Freddie Gray case, with critics noting that she played to the crowd and was not professional when announcing charges against six officers for his death. National Public Radio reports on June 11 that the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund (LELDF) has invited journalists and other community officers to participate in police training to show how dangerous police work is and how decision-making can be very difficult for officers.
Those who favor existing police practices explain that reforms are trying to transform police officers into social workers and this is not aligned with what police officers should be doing. They also argue that the anti-police climate that has emerged after incidents in Ferguson, New York City, North Charleston, and Baltimore has empowered criminals since officers are more hesitant to do their jobs and that this is producing a new nationwide crime wave. This so-called “Ferguson effect” does have some statistical basis as The Christian Science Monitor reveals on June 10 that Baltimore saw forty-two murders in May, which was its highest monthly total since 1974. In addition, Milwaukee has seen a 180% increase in homicides over last year’s numbers and New York City’s homicide rate has risen 20% this year. The Washington Post reports on May 17 that black community leaders in Baltimore allege that the police are slowing down their activity as a possible protest against their leadership and other city officials, producing more violence in communities already ravaged by crime. However, it is not necessarily clear from statistical data that a new nationwide crime wave is forming due to police reform efforts. First, CNN writes on June 5 that a majority of Baltimore’s violence may be linked to turf wars in the illegal drug trade. It explains that the riots saw the looting of at least twenty-seven pharmacies and drug clinics, with looters making off with drugs such as fentanyl, oxycodone, amphetamines, Adderall, hydrocodone, morphine, and tramdol. These drugs fetch high market prices, well in excess of other illegal drugs such as heroin, and fights over independent sellers going into the turf held by gangs and other dealers may be leading to the uptick in crime. Second, CNN reports on June 4 that not all major cities are witnessing an increase in their crime rates, with Dallas and Los Angeles seeing a decrease in crime. Third, observers note that a small uptick in crime has to be expected due to the fact that the last few decades have seen a steep fall in the overall national crime rate. Remember, experts are still in dispute over what caused this as some favor the aggressive police tactics of New York City, while others point to factors such as the legalization of abortion and the end of the crack cocaine epidemic that devastated American inner cities in the latter half of the twentieth century. And fourth, The Guardian argues on June 6 that short-term statistical trends are far too complex to generalize that rising homicide rates in some cities are due to an “anti-police bias.”
Finally, Government Technology Magazine makes the argument that much of the attention for police reform has centered on large, metropolitan areas. These police forces tend to be larger and they are dealing with a larger population so more crime and police-suspect interactions have a greater chance of taking place. As a result, many reform proposals have been focused on what large cities need, but these reforms may not be applicable to rural law enforcement agencies. For example, increasing the number of training hours that officers need to have is easier for city police departments to manage because they have more officers on call to serve as substitutes for officers that are being trained. Rural police departments do not have this luxury so reforms could prove more costly for them. As The Sacramento Bee explains, Attorney General Kamala Harris, who is running for the Senate in 2016, has said that a statewide body camera rule might not be advisable since different police departments operate under different local customs. However, proponents of standardized rules say that a “one size fits all” approach is necessary because departments have to work together in some cases so when that happens they need to be guided by the same rules.
The debate over police reform is likely to continue for the next several years and will likely play a role in the 2016 presidential election. Democrats are likely to use police reforms to drive turnout from minority communities, while Republicans are likely to argue that liberal reforms will produce more crime. There is a public appetite for police reform, but as in many cases the devil is in the details. An effective reform strategy will be one that is cost effective, yet provides greater transparency for police actions. If police-community tensions can be resolved, especially in large urban areas, then the U.S. might be able to continue fighting crime effectively while restraining the excesses of police behavior.
This is the last topic brief of the 2014-2015 season. I hope that these briefs have greatly assisted your understanding of domestic and international topics, while also providing you with great resources for your files. If you have any suggestions for next year’s topic briefs, feel free to contact me at [email protected]. The first premium topic brief for 2015-2016 will be posted on August 4 and 2015-2016 season subscriptions will be made available for pre-order in July.