Defund the Police?
The final of 3 newsletters discussing the events that preceded the times we are in and what must be done to not only overcome the disarray of the country, but to ensure against its reoccurrence.
On June 21st we will have reached the halfway mark of 2020, and already we are witnessing a seminal moment in our nation’s history much like the years of 1968, 1876, 1860, 1787, and 1773, which will have consequential ramifications for the years to come. From the COVID-19 pandemic wreaking havoc to the nadir of the American economy at levels not seen in nearly a century to nationwide protest pertaining to civil rights and police reform in the wake of the murder of George Floyd, it has become clear that change is coming and the question is what will it look like? Though it is unclear we can envisage the desirable outcome that sets America on the trajectory of social justice that is benefitted by the black community and communities of color.
In the wake of George Floyd’s death there has been celeritous action being taken at every strata of government with municipalities implementing initiatives to greatly reduce policing functions such as Louisville City Council consensually voting to ban issuance of no-knock warrants and Los Angeles debating Mayor Garcetti’s proposal to cut the police department budget by up to 50%; multiple governors have signed into law police reform bills that further enforce accountability and enable victims of egregious police misconduct to receive due process, and the United States House of Representatives has introduced legislation that establishes a federal registry for officers who have committed malfeasance and requires regional polities to develop plans of appointing an outside special prosecutor to overlook investigations among other things. These objectives are promising but still more incisive actions are needed to fundamentally transform normative policing as it relates to equity and justice.
Before explicating by now you have probably been acquainted with the term “defund the police” as the clarion call for reforming modern law enforcement. The essence of the phrase has been used metonymically with a tranche of proponents describing it as their desire to systematically overhaul police agencies through demilitarization, further promulgation of de-escalation tactics, and greater emphasis on social advocacy functions, and the other tranche adopting it as an iconoclastic purview in which formal policing is abolished altogether and in its wake resources are allocated to schools and other means to curtail poverty rates and crime. Now to be frank it is quixotic to believe that law enforcement will be fully eradicated primarily due to it being a cogent entity of systemic racism whose origins date back several centuries, and as a result has become firmly entrenched in our society. If law enforcement were to be abolished there would exist a vacuum that would be filled and potentially further exacerbate problems by engendering fragmentary disputes and privatized protection that would preclude poorer communities. Instead we must engage in a full-scale rectification starting from the immense influence of police unions/associations to the capabilities of the governments at the state and federal level to the actions of the citizenry.
Unions
Generally speaking unions serve an integral purpose in helping to aid workers in receiving tenable wages, protection of rights, ensuring due process and retention of legal counsel, but even the most innocuous emprises can be ramified to their nefarious extremes as is the case with police unions. Throughout the history of the United States the government has displayed intransigence when it comes to the issues of worker’s rights and this is no different for police officers. After World War II an influx of service members became employed as police officers and subsequently led to the resuscitation of police unions all over the country after a lengthy hiatus due to fears of public welfare being endangered following the Boston police force going on strike in the fall of 1919.
By 1970, unions had amassed significant clout and were able to extend their interests thanks in part to broad and ambiguous collective bargaining agreements formulated by their respective municipalities. The interests included actions that limited accountability to the public, stymied civil rights of denizens, and in some departments prevented the ability of punishing/terminating officers for impropriety. In order to bring about meaningful change we must start by imploring local government officials to ameliorate the language of collective bargaining agreement provisions to ensure equitable treatment for community members. Here is what I recommend:
Terms for CBA
Unions and/or individuals representing the union must disclose political contributions given to individuals applying for local/county government positions
Allegations detailing misconduct by an police officer must be on file for a period for 5 years barring further malfeasance
Local/county governments are responsible for administering disciplinary functions
Establish disciplinary process that includes firing officers who have over 15 sustained complaints over the course of their career
Accused officer must produce an affidavit, notarized by an magistrate, prior to accessing evidentiary functions
Officer salary cannot exceed 120% of state median salary for police officers
Implement training primarily focused on de-escalation
Training is to focus on officers decreasing tenuous circumstances exercising non-lethal recourse, which included guns and rubber bullets
Officers who have become wayward can be fired for cause and forfeit severance pay
Police Departments
Since the 1980s, law enforcement agencies have become akin to a paramilitary force thanks to the acquisition of artillery excesses from the armed forces (whose $730B budget is so gratuitous that it could be cut by 50% and would still exceed $100B over the next highest country, but that is a topic for another day), with weaponry such as this, this, and this, which contravenes the Geneva Gas Protocol of 1925. In just the last couple of weeks there have been countless instances of peaceful protestors getting maimed, and in some cases killed. It is imperative that the commencement of demilitarizing the police begins immediately, while simultaneously enacting programs that focus primarily on the obligations of police officers as guardians and building rapport with community residents. Activities like luncheons, partaking in games, and public study halls can facilitate relations that contribute to decreasing crime rates and strengthening trust. There also needs to be accountability among department officials meaning that officers must be able to report their contemporaries who engage in misconduct without fear of facing backlash. Here is what I recommend:
Officers serve the public and are instrumentalities of the government, and as such they shall be privated of salary while under investigation
Officers must serve suspensions; cannot compensate by using PTO/sick days
Department personnel overseeing information related to allegations of police misconduct must report to their immediate supervisor and recuse themselves if conflict of interest arises
Supervisors shall not punish officers for reporting malfeasance
Government
As mentioned before the federal government has introduced legislation that addresses funding requirements for law enforcement agencies and establishes a registry for ignoble officers, but the most substantial impact will need to come at the regional level. Municipalities must take control of the disciplinary process and enact agreements with regional district attorney offices to oversee departmental investigations of the other. Also governments need to reduce the policing budget and supplement other services like mental health, drug addiction counseling, domestic abuse, vulnerable children, etc. Whenever someone calls 911 for the aforementioned purposes it should be codified into law that the dispatcher is to reroute the call to the appropriate authorities. Officers should have a minor role in supervising the situation for protection while remaining at a considerable distance. Here is what I recommend:
Prohibit jurisdiction of investigations from district prosecutors domiciled in the area of concern
Settlements are to be fulfilled through the pension fund of the guilty officer(s)
Require departments to issue body cameras along with gun cameras; emphasize severe repercussions if cameras are turned off/disabled
Establish separate investigatory panel to determine instances where police is misconduct is either alleged or evinced
Create supervisory board comprised of senior law enforcement and local community leaders
Decriminalize trivial offenses including marijuana usage, vagrancy, and minor economic offenses less like bad checks of or under $100
You
The only way we can effectuate change is by engaging in our civic responsibilities. It is critical that you research the candidates for offices at every level by watching debates and going to campaign websites to read where they stand on the issues. If you have not done so, go to votetexas.gov and register to vote by tomorrow so you can participate in the primary elections in July.
We need to be earnest and diligent in our quest for meaningful change. It is not enough to vote, we also need to hold our elected leaders accountable by staying up to date on their actions and inquiring of their decisions. In October, the United States Supreme Court will begin deciding whether to hear cases pertaining to assent qualified immunity for law enforcement officials. Qualified immunity allows officers to be indemnified from lawsuits if judges cannot determine if there has been a violation of “clearly established” statutory/constitutional rights. Due to this nebulous threshold, plaintiffs have been denied redress in the majority of qualified immunity cases over the last three years.
It is important that we are vociferous in our demands to make stringent the prerequisites for qualified immunity to our elected statesmen, especially those in the Senate who will be tasked with appointing new members of the judicature including on the Supreme Court as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg - a trailblazer who has conquered multiple bouts of cancer and other maladies - could potentially be stepping down and with the court already leaning towards a conservative majority, the next appointee chosen will effect American jurisprudence for decades to come. Here is what I recommend:
Elect statemen that prioritizes police reform
Don’t focus on party affiliation, rather choose based on the substance of their stances
Demand that elected officials appoint judges who will ameliorate qualified immunity
Petition current state representatives to file amicus brief for when the Supreme Court takes up litigation pertaining to the parameters of qualified immunity
We are truly living in surreal times with major consequences, both positive and negative, on the horizon. May God grant us discernment in choosing the appropriate path. God Bless.