Messaging And Report Tag: criminal justice

The term “racial profile” first entered the American lexicon in January 1998 when an AP story titled “Veteran Cop Goes on Trial; Race an Issue in Traffic Stop” was published in several regional newspapers. The article described the trial of Aaron Campbell, a Black man who happened to be a police officer, who was pulled over by sheriff’s deputies in Orange County, Florida and then pepper sprayed, wrestled to the ground, and arrested when he objected to the stop:

Campbell is scheduled to go on trial today on charges of felony assault and resisting arrest with violence. His lawyer said the stop was illegal, and the only thing Campbell was guilty of was DWB, driving while black, and fitting a profile that Orange County deputies use to identify motorists to be stopped and searched for contraband…. The Orange County sheriff’s office says stops aren’t based on a racial profile. (AP, January 12, 1998)

“Racial profiling” was mentioned in a smattering of newspaper articles over the course of 1998, but by 1999 it had vaulted to the top of the nation’s public policy agenda. It was the subject not only of thousands of articles, editorials, and television and radio broadcasts, but also of Congressional and state legislative hearings and proposals. In 2000, both presidential candidates, Al Gore and George W. Bush, deplored it during their campaigns, and both vowed to issue executive orders banning it if elected. By 2001, more than a dozen state legislatures had passed new laws requiring their law enforcement agencies to collect race and ethnicity data for all traffic stops. By the end of 1999, a majority of Americans, both Black and white, believed that racial profiling was both widespread and unfair.[1]

This case study describes the narrative shift that occurred in just 3 years, between 1999 and 2001, and how advocates made it happen. It also describes the gradual weakening of resolve to end racial profiling in the aftermath of 9/11 and the reemergence of the anti-racial profiling narrative in the years since the murder of Trayvon Martin in 2012 and the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement.

METHODOLOGY

INTERVIEWEES:

• John Crew, Founding Director of the ACLU’s Campaign Against Racial Profiling
• Ira Glasser, former Executive Director of the ACLU
• David A. Harris, author of Profiles in Injustice
• Wade Henderson, former President and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
• Laura W. Murphy, former Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office
• Reggie Shuford, Executive Director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania and former lead racial profiling litigator for the ACLU

OTHER SOURCES CONSULTED:

• Michelle Alexander, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The New Press, 2010.
• Frank R. Baumgartner, Derek A Epp, and Kelsey Shoub, Suspect Citizens: What 20 Million Traffic Stops Tell Us About Policing and Race. Cambridge University Press, 2018.
• David Cole, No Equal Justice: Race and Class in the American Criminal Justice System. The New Press, 1999.
• David A. Harris, Profiles in Injustice. The New Press, 2002.
• Khalil Gibran Muhammad, The Condemnation of Blackness: Race, Crime, and the Making of Modern Urban America. First Harvard University Press, 2019.
• Craig Reinarman and Harry G. Levine (Eds.), Crack In America: Demon Drugs and Social Justice. University of California Press, 1997.

MEDIA AND SOCAL MEDIA RESEARCH

To identify media trends, we developed a series of search terms and used the LexisNexis database, which provides access to more than 40,000 sources, including up-to-date and archived news. For social media trends we utilized the social listening tool Brandwatch, a leading social media analytics software that aggregates publicly available social media data.

BACKGROUND

The dangers of “driving while Black” were well known to Black people long before the late-1990s, as Ric Burns’s recent film of the same name documents so effectively. Efforts to control African Americans’ mobility date back to the arrival of the first enslaved Africans in the New World in 1619. The Fugitive Slave Act of 1783 authorized local governments to seize and return escapees to their owners and empowered any white person to question any Black person they saw. But the “war on drugs,” declared by President Reagan in 1982, introduced a new tool to impede the free movement of motorists of color. In 1986, in the midst of the crack cocaine “epidemic,” which was depicted as a Black, inner-city problem, the Drug Enforcement Agency launched “Operation Pipeline.” This drug interdiction program ultimately trained 27,000 law enforcement officers in 48 states to use pretext stops (e.g., going slightly over the speed limit or failing to signal) in order to search for drugs. The training encouraged the police to use a race-based “drug courier profile” to pull over motorists; consequently, civil rights organizations saw an uptick of complaints of unfair treatment on the nation’s highways. By the early-1990s, the uptick had become a flood. Disturbing stories like the following examples began to appear in the media, often in the context of civil rights lawsuits brought by racial profiling victims:

An elderly African-American couple sued the Maryland State Police yesterday, alleging that a search of their vehicle and possessions along Interstate 95 by troopers was an unlawful act of racial discrimination and false imprisonment. The suit, stemming from a July 12, 1994, traffic stop in Cecil County, was filed in Baltimore County Circuit Court by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of Charles Carter, 66, and Etta Carter, 65. The Carters of Mount Airy, Pa., allege that they were traveling home on their 40th anniversary after visiting a daughter in Florida when they were stopped and detained for several hours while police “methodically examined the contents of virtually every item” in their rented minivan, scattering items on the roadside.

SOURCE: BALTIMORE SUN

Officials in Eagle County, Colorado paid $800,000 in damages in 1995 to Black and Latino motorists stopped on Interstate 70 solely because they fit a drug courier profile. The payment settled a class-action lawsuit filed by the ACLU on behalf of 402 people stopped between August 1988 and August 1990 on I-70 between Eagle and Glenwood Springs, none of whom were ticketed or arrested for drugs.

SOURCE: ROCKY MOUNTAIN NEWS

In California, San Diego Chargers football player Shawn Lee was pulled over, and he and his girlfriend were handcuffed and detained by police for half an hour on the side of Interstate 15. The officer said that Lee was stopped because he was driving a vehicle that fit the description of one stolen earlier that evening. However, Lee was driving a Jeep Cherokee, a sport utility vehicle, and the reportedly stolen vehicle was a Honda sedan.

SOURCE: SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE

In addition to compelling stories of innocent Black people being stopped, searched, and humiliated on interstate highways, the lawsuits led to the collection of hard data to prove the plaintiffs’ contention that racial profiling was real. Dr. John Lamberth, a Temple University Professor of Psychology with expertise in statistics, was retained by plaintiffs to carry out a series of studies. He designed a research methodology to determine first, the rate at which Black people were being stopped, ticketed, and/or arrested on a section of a given highway, and second, the percentage of Black people among drivers on that same stretch of road. He also measured the population of violators of traffic laws, broken down by race to see whether disproportionate stops of drivers of color were due to their driving behavior, rather than racial profiling. These studies were carried out in New Jersey, Maryland, Illinois, and Ohio, and they all came to the same conclusion: state troopers were singling out motorists of color for discriminatory treatment. In Maryland, although only 17 percent of the drivers on the relevant roadway were Black, well over 70 percent of those stopped and searched were Black. In New Jersey, the race of the driver was the only factor that predicted which cars police stopped. Professor David A. Harris, who has written widely on the subject, observed:

These findings and those in other studies—performed in different places, at different times, with different data, and involving different police departments—all point in the same direction: The disproportionate use of traffic stops against minorities is not just a bunch of stories, or a chain of anecdotes strung together into the latest social trend. On the contrary, it is a real, measurable phenomenon.[2]

The release of these statistics generated more media coverage. The number of stories about racial profiling published in U.S. newspapers increased tenfold between 1998 and 1999. Calls for action were coming from civil rights and civil liberties organizations and African American elected leaders as complaints from their constituents poured in. At community meetings and legislative hearings around the country, racial profiling victims were testifying, oftentimes in tears, about their experiences. The New Jersey Legislative Black and Latino Caucus, for example, held three regional public hearings in April 1999 and concluded:

The testimony and other evidence adduced at the Caucus hearings confirmed what minority motorists have known for years—racial profiling has long been the ‘unofficial’ modus operandi of the State Police. The State Police hierarchy has unofficially encouraged, condoned and rewarded the practice. Reverend Reginald Jackson, Executive Director of the Black Ministers Council of New Jersey explained the situation in stark terms: ‘Racial profiling was the worst kept secret in New Jersey.’

The New Jersey hearings were closely followed by the media, and headlines served to frame the issue:

• “Hearing probes trooper racism,” Asbury Park Press, April 14, 1999
• “In Hearing, Blacks Tell of Stops by Troopers; Legislators Examine Profiling Complaints,” The Record (Bergen County), April 14, 1999
• “Minorities describe humiliation by State Police,” The Star-Ledger (Newark, New Jersey), April 14, 1999

At the federal level, Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) introduced the Traffic Stops Statistics Act, which would have required that police departments collect demographic data on each traffic stop and that the U.S. Attorney General then conduct a study based on the data. It passed the House in 1998 without a single dissenting vote, but it died in the Senate.[3]

In the meantime, pushback from the police establishment was increasing. In a much-quoted statement, the superintendent of the New Jersey State Police, then under scrutiny by the courts and the state legislature, opined, “The drug problem is mostly cocaine and marijuana. It is most likely a minority group that’s involved with that.” In the fall of 1998, Attorney General Janet Reno held a national summit on the problem of race and traffic stops. In addition to local, state, and federal law enforcement representatives and U.S. attorneys from around the country, several advocacy organizations, including the National Urban League and the ACLU, were in attendance. Those from law enforcement struck a defensive tone according to one of the participants, claiming: “There is no such thing as racial profiling. It doesn’t exist. Collection of data on traffic stops that tracked race would be unnecessary and dangerous and an insult to every person who wore a badge. Merely raising the issue was a slap in the face to the brave officers who risked their lives to keep the peace.”[4]

All the lawsuits, hearings, and media coverage were still not producing the kind of policy changes that were needed. Every hour of every day, motorists of color were still being stopped; searched; and, in some cases, traumatized on the nation’s roads and highways. More had to be done. As frustration mounted, the ACLU decided to escalate its campaign.

THE ACLU’S CAMPAIGN AGAINST RACIAL PROFILING

The ACLU’s first challenge to racial profiling had been in the form of a class-action lawsuit against the Maryland State Police (MSP) on behalf of Robert L. Wilkins, an African American attorney who was stopped, detained, and searched in 1992 while driving to Washington, D.C., from Chicago. When he refused to consent to a search, the police told him, “You’re gonna have to wait here for the dog.” Wilkins and the other members of his family who were passengers were forced to get out of the car and stand in the dark and the rain by the side of the highway until the canine patrol arrived and confirmed there were no drugs in the car. The case was settled in 1993 and the settlement decree included a requirement that the state monitor highway searches for any pattern of discrimination. Three years later, the data showed that the MSP was still engaging in racial profiling. In his report to the court, statistician John Lamberth concluded:

While no one can know the motivations of each individual trooper in conducting a traffic stop, the statistics presented herein, representing a broad and detailed sample of highly appropriate data, show without question a racially discriminatory impact on blacks and other minority motorists from state police behavior along I-95.

Other lawsuits followed, and as the cases mounted, the ACLU’s National Legal Department assigned one of its staff attorneys to work with the organization’s fifty-plus state affiliates to generate more cases.

In February 1999 the ACLU of Northern California launched its Driving While Black or Brown campaign. Under the direction of staff attorney Michelle Alexander and communications director Elaine Elinson, it “aimed to inspire a shift in public consciousness on race and criminal justice.” The campaign established a “DWB Hotline” and aggressively publicized the stories it received. It held press conferences so that people who had called the hotline could speak directly to the media. It put up fifty billboards in African American and Latino neighborhoods advertising the campaign and the hotline and it produced several radio ads that dramatized the experience of being unfairly pulled over by the police. All this activity succeeded in growing a coalition that included civil rights and civic and faith organizations. According to Alexander and Elinson:

In many respects, the campaign was a greater success than we ever hoped or imagined. When the campaign began, the terms ‘racial profiling’ or ‘DWB’ were not widely used, and the problems associated with those practices were not part of the political discourse. At the peak of the campaign, those terms, and the problems they represented, permeated the political discourse in communities of all color in California and nationwide. Thousands of people participated in grassroots organizing efforts. Personal stories of racial profiling filled the airwaves.[6]

The national ACLU decided to adopt the Northern California affiliate’s model. On June 2, 1999 the organization held a press conference at its headquarters in New York City to announce the launch of a new national campaign. “We are here today to demand an end to racial profiling. The ACLU is using all of its available legal resources as well as advertising, public service announcements, statistical reports and yes, the media, to get our message out. Racial profiling of minority motorists is restoring Jim Crow justice in America,” said Executive Director Ira Glasser. The press conference was the occasion for the release of a 43-page report, “Driving While Black: Racial Profiling on Our Nation’s Highways.” Authored by David A. Harris, then a Professor of Law at the University of Toledo College of Law, the report linked the increase in racial profiling to the war on drugs and articulated the narrative that the ACLU was committed to “getting out”:

From the outset, the war on drugs has in fact been a war on people and their constitutional rights, with African Americans, Latinos and other minorities bearing the brunt of the damage. It is a war that has, among other depredations, spawned racist profiles of supposed drug couriers. On our nation’s highways today, police ostensibly looking for drug criminals routinely stop drivers based on the color of their skin. This practice is so common that the minority community has given it the derisive term, ‘driving while black or brown’—a play on the real offense of ‘driving while intoxicated.’

The announcement and the report received widespread media coverage, with articles referring specifically to “driving while Black” increasing from just 72 articles in 1998 to more than 300 in 1999.

Some of the headlines that clearly named the problem included:

• “Racial Profiling is Rising Nationwide, an ACLU Study Reports the ‘War on Drugs’ Targets Minorities, it says. Among its Suggestions: That Police Keep Better Data on Traffic Stops,” The Philadelphia Inquirer, June 3, 1999
• “ACLU report blasts racial profiling,” The Boston Globe, June 3, 1999
• “ACLU seeks end to racial profiling,” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, June 2, 1999
• “Racial Profiling in Drug War Like Jim Crow: ACLU,” New York Daily News, June 3, 1999

The ACLU’s strategy was based on the adage that “sunlight is the best disinfectant.”[7] People would oppose injustice if only they knew about it. Glasser explains:

Racial profiling on our highways had long been a secret kept from most Americans and virtually from all white Americans. But it was never a secret to its victims…. And so it became important to us at the ACLU to spread this news around. It became our mission and our agenda to gather the information as systematically as we could and to make it as widely known as we could.

A nationwide toll-free hotline was established (1-877-6-PROFILE) for victims to call, and a complaint form was featured on the ACLU’s website. A full-page ad was placed in Emerge, then a popular magazine for Black audiences, and a public service announcement publicizing the hotline aired on Black radio stations nationwide. A “Driving While Black or Brown” kit composed of a sample letter to members of Congress in support of the Traffic Stops Statistics Act, stickers with the hotline number, and the ACLU’s so-called “bust card” explaining what to do if stopped by the police, was distributed in the tens of thousands. The organization’s Public Education Department kept up a steady stream of press releases and backgrounders for reporters and placed speakers, including victims of racial profiling, at conferences and on TV and radio broadcasts. Its Washington Legislative Office provided testimony and worked with the Congressional Black Caucus to drum up support for federal legislation. Its state affiliates worked with their allies, including the NAACP, the Urban League, and Black police organizations to generate support for state legislation and to pressure law enforcement agencies to collect data on a voluntary basis. It was all hands on deck.

Because the ACLU had offices in every state, the organization was able to generate activity on multiple fronts. Community speak-outs with journalists in attendance were held to give voice to victims of racial profiling. Advocates representing state and local civil rights coalitions engaged in public speaking and appeared in radio and television broadcasts and called for concrete action. The first step was to enact laws requiring the collection of data to establish that racial profiling was taking place. Once established, advocates would then lobby for legislation to ban it. The first state to pass legislation requiring data collection was North Carolina, with the ACLU of North Carolina working closely with the state legislature’s Black Caucus. Other states followed suit with substantial editorial support from all regions of the country:

• “An end to profiling,” The Courier-Journal (Louisville, Kentucky), April 23, 2000
• “State must do what it can to stop racial profiling,” The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 18, 1999
• “Racial profiling real and should cease,” San Antonio Express News, June 20, 1999
• “Stop Racial Profiling,” St. Petersburg Times (Florida), December 23, 2000
• “Act Now on Racial Profiling,” The San Francisco Chronicle, January 19, 2000

By any measure, the campaign was impactful. A week after the initial press conference and release of the Harris report in June 1999, President Bill Clinton declared that racial profiling was “morally indefensible” and ordered federal law-enforcement agencies to compile data on the race and ethnicity of people they question, search, or arrest to determine whether suspects were being stopped because of the color of their skin. A Gallup poll released in December 1999 revealed that 59 percent of the public believed that racial profiling was widespread, and 81 percent disapproved of its use by police. In 1999 alone, fifteen states considered legislation mandating the collection of traffic-stop information and, ultimately, twenty-nine of the forty-nine state police agencies with patrol duties would require the collection of race and ethnicity data.[8] Media coverage increased dramatically over the course of the campaign, from 2,741 stories in 1999 to close to 9,000 stories in 2001. In his February 27, 2001 address to a Joint Session of Congress, newly elected President George W. Bush declared that “racial profiling is wrong and we will end it in America.”

But the campaign’s most profound impact was its disruption of a deeply entrenched American narrative—what Ta-Nehisi Coates calls “the enduring myth of Black criminality.”

THE MYTH OF BLACK CRIMINALITY

Negative stereotypes about Black people abound in America, and one of the oldest is the stereotype that they are violent and predisposed to crime. In his 2015 lengthy essay “The Black Family in the Age of Mass Incarceration” (published in The Atlantic magazine) Ta-Nehisi Coates avers that “Black people are the preeminent outlaws of the American imagination”:

Black criminality is literally written into the American Constitution—the Fugitive Slave Clause, in Article IV of that document…the crime of absconding was thought to be linked to other criminal inclinations…. Nearly a century and a half before the infamy of Willy Horton, a portrait emerged of Blacks as highly prone to criminality, and generally beyond the scope of rehabilitation.

Like other negative racial stereotypes, Black criminality has proven to be a long-lived feature of American culture. One scholar, writing in the Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, observes:

In American society, a prevalent representation of crime is that it is overwhelmingly committed by young Black men. Subsequently, the familiarity many Americans have with the image of a young Black male as a violent and menacing street thug is fueled and perpetuated by typifications everywhere. In fact, perceptions about the presumed racial identity of criminals may be so ingrained in public consciousness that race does not even need to be specifically mentioned for a connection to be made between the two because it seems that talking about crime is talking about race.[9]

The myth and stereotype of Black criminality was reinforced and magnified during the 1980s and ’90s when crack cocaine became a national obsession. The media depicted crack as a Black, inner-city phenomenon. Local and national news shows were rife with footage of police breaking down the doors of “crack houses” and of Black and Brown men and women being carted off in handcuffs. Time and Newsweek each devoted five cover stories to crack and the drug crisis in 1986 alone, and CBS aired 48 Hours on Crack Street, featuring Black drug dealers. In The New Jim Crow, Michelle Alexander writes:

Thousands of stories about the crack crisis flooded the airwaves and newsstands, and the stories had a clear racial subtext. The articles typically featured black ‘crack whores,’ ‘crack babies,’ and ‘gangbangers,’ reinforcing already prevalent racial stereotypes of black women as irresponsible, selfish ‘welfare queens,’ and black men as ‘predators’—part of an inferior and criminal subculture.[10]

Intensified street-level enforcement of the drug laws in low-income communities of color filled the jails and prisons with Black and brown people, further reifying the myth of Black criminality. Politicians, eager to prove their anti-crime bona fides, introduced and passed a raft of new drug laws, lengthening sentences and eliminating parole. By 1994, more Americans named crime as “the most important problem facing this country today” than any other problem, and 85 percent of the public thought courts were not harsh enough. That year a bipartisan Congress would pass and President Clinton would sign the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which incentivized states to enact mandatory sentencing laws and pumped close to $10 billion into new prison construction. That same year, the U.S. Justice Department announced that the prison population topped 1 million for the first time in U.S. history. What has come to be known as “mass incarceration” was well underway.

Then, in 1995, the myth received another boost. In November of that year, Princeton political scientist John DiLulio published an essay that would receive enormous media attention. Titled “The Coming of the Super-Predator” and appearing in The Weekly Standard, a then new conservative magazine, DiLulio darkly warned that like a contagion, Black criminality would spread beyond the ghetto and into “even the rural heartland”:

We’re not just talking about teenagers. We’re talking about boys whose voices have yet to change. We’re talking about elementary school youngsters who pack guns instead of lunches. We’re talking about kids who have absolutely no respect for human life and no sense of the future. In short, we’re talking big trouble that hasn’t yet begun to crest. And make no mistake. While the trouble will be greatest in black inner-city neighborhoods, other places are also certain to have burgeoning youth-crime problems that will spill over into upscale central-city districts, inner-ring suburbs, and even the rural heartland.

The term was quickly adopted by the media; researchers found nearly 300 uses of the word “super-predator” in forty leading newspapers and magazines from 1995 to 2000.[11] Those researchers point out that just a few years before, the news media had introduced the terms “wilding” and “wolf pack” to the national vocabulary, to describe five teenagers—four Black and one Latino— who were convicted and later exonerated of the rape of a woman in New York’s Central Park. This incident incited sensationalist coverage that declared the teenagers guilty before trial and led then hotel mogul Donald Trump to call for their execution. Kim Taylor-Thompson, a law professor at New York University, noted: “This kind of animal imagery was already in the conversation. The super-predator language began a process of allowing us to suspend our feelings of empathy towards young people of color.”

This was the political and cultural environment in which the ACLU and its allies sought to build public opposition to racial profiling. Racial profiling and the myth of black criminality were, and are, inextricably intertwined. By focusing on how a system preyed upon the innocent, the campaign to end racial profiling disrupted the myth and complicated things, allowing a new narrative about race and criminal justice to emerge. The mistreatment of Black people by law enforcement was not a matter of a few bad apples among the police; it was a matter of policy decisions that were made by those in authority. In spite of a deluge of dog whistles and overtly racialized media coverage linking criminality with Black people, a very substantial majority of Americans—81 percent according to the Gallup poll—did not want the police to target people based on skin color. Racial profiling was wrong.

CAMPAIGN INTERRUPTED

In August 2001 hearings were held before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary concerning the End Racial Profiling Act of 2001. The Act, which was sponsored by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Rep. Conyers and had bipartisan sponsors from both chambers, had been hammered out with input from civil rights and civil liberties advocates as well as law enforcement experts and practitioners. It would have required federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies to take steps to cease and prevent the practice, including implementing effective complaint procedures and disciplinary procedures for officers who engaged in the practice.[12] In his welcoming remarks, Sen. Feingold said, “Racial profiling is a shame on our society that must be stopped. It is unjust. It is un-American.” He noted that, “There is an emerging consensus in America that racial profiling is wrong and should be brought to an end” and emphasized the profound harms it caused to African Americans:

I have also heard from African American parents that they feel they must do something that would not even cross the minds of white parents: instruct their children from a very early age about the prospect and even likelihood of being stopped by the police when they haven’t done anything wrong. That to me is a chilling fact. Racial profiling leads to our children being taught from an early age, as a matter of self-protection, that they will not be fairly treated by law enforcement based on the content of their character, but instead will be seen as suspicious based on the color of their skin.[13]

By September 10 headlines indicated that the Act and various efforts around the country to bring racial profiling under control were underway and still had considerable media traction:

• “NJ kicks off two-day summit on racial profiling,” The Associated Press, September 10, 2001
• “Racial Profiling New Police Policy is a Good Step Toward Ending Abusive Practice,” Editorial, The Post-Standard (Syracuse, NY), September 10, 2001
• “Justice Dept. to begin nationwide study of racial profiling with voluntary participation by police,” The Associated Press, September 10, 2001
• “Forum on Racial Profiling Aims to Ask Questions,” The Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, VA), September 10, 2001
• “Officials answer racial profiling questions at NAACP event,” The Kansas City Star, September 10, 2001

Then 9/11 happened.

The events of 9/11 and its aftermath stymied the campaign to end racial profiling. The new narrative—that racial profiling was systemic, wrong, unconstitutional, and un-American—was not yet strong enough or capacious enough to resist the calls for the widespread ethnic profiling that was a key feature of the domestic “war on terror.” In a white paper published by The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the country’s largest and most diverse civil rights coalition deplored the breakdown of a “national consensus against racial profiling”:

In the months preceding September 11, 2001, a national consensus had developed on the need to end racial profiling. The enactment of a comprehensive federal statute banning the practice seemed imminent. However, on 9/11, everything changed. In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, the federal government focused massive investigatory resources on Arabs and Muslims, singling them out for questioning, detention, and other law enforcement activities. Many of these counterterrorism initiatives involved racial profiling.[14]

Ethnic profiling, by both law enforcement and the general public, would go on for years, and although it was challenged in numerous lawsuits and criticized by a broad coalition that included leaders representing the gamut of religious faiths, most Americans accepted it as a necessary tool to prevent new acts of terrorism. On the 1-year anniversary of the attack, the Pew Research Center conducted a survey and found that two-thirds of Americans favored allowing airport personnel to do extra checks on passengers “who appear to be of Middle-Eastern descent.”[15]

The national debate over immigration, which reached a.crescendo in the spring of 2007 when the U.S. Senate was considering the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, further weakened the nation’s commitment to end racial and ethnic profiling. The Act, which had the support of President Bush during his final year in office, would have provided legal status and a path to citizenship for the approximately 12 million undocumented immigrants. In spite of the fact that public opinion surveys showed substantial support for comprehensive reform, the anti-immigrant movement led by media personalities such as Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly mobilized followers to inundate the Senate with anti-reform mail and the Act was shelved.

In this increasingly hostile political environment, the ethnic profiling of suspected “illegal aliens” reached new heights in 2010 with Arizona’s passage of the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act (SB 1070). The law sanctioned profiling by requiring state law enforcement officers to determine an individual’s immigration status during a “lawful stop, detention or arrest” when there was “reasonable suspicion that the individual is an illegal immigrant.” The law was immediately denounced by immigrants’ rights organizations and their allies and several lawsuits were quickly filed, including one by the U.S. Department of Justice, challenging the law’s constitutionality. But polls taken during the controversy showed that a majority of Americans supported the law, including 70 percent of Arizona voters.

It is fair to say that during the first decade of the twenty-first century, the nation’s commitment to ending racial profiling was in retreat. The issue did not disappear, and flare-ups such as the arrest of Henry Louis Gates as he entered his own home and the subsequent “beer summit” held by President Obama continued to draw headlines. But the narrative that had propelled so much discussion, protest, and policy advocacy during the period leading up to 9/11 had lost its urgency as the public discourse shifted its focus to national security, immigration, and other hot button issues.

Most of the laws passed by states mandating the collection of data stayed in effect for just 2 or 3 years as their purpose was to determine whether law enforcement was engaging in racial profiling. In most instances, the data were never even analyzed, and when they were, few meaningful steps were taken to address the racial disparities that were found.[16] North Carolina, which was the very first state to enact a data collection law, had accumulated data on 20 million traffic stops before an analysis was finally undertaken by three academics in 2015.[17] Although it was reintroduced year after year by Rep. Conyers, the End Racial and Religious Profiling Act was never passed. By 2011, when The Leadership Conference issued its white paper urging the restoration of a “national consensus” to end racial profiling and the passage of The End Racial Profiling Act (of 2010), the campaign was sputtering.

CAMPAIGN REENERGIZED

In early 2012, a tragedy rekindled the campaign to end racial profiling. On the night of February 26, Trayvon Martin, an unarmed 17-year-old African American high school student, was followed, shot, and killed by self-styled neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida. Protests erupted nationwide as the police initially declined to arrest Zimmerman. From the start, Martin was said to be a victim of racial profiling—a young Black man wearing a hoodie and walking alone in a gated community. The myth of Black criminality was never far from the surface in such scenarios. At a demonstration at the state capitol in Tallahassee 3 weeks after the killing protesters called for a task force to be formed to address racial profiling: “Trayvon Martin is dead because of racial profiling,” one of the organizers said. “We all deal with it every single day and we want the governor to pay attention to that.”[18] Finally, after weeks of nationwide “Justice for Trayvon” demonstrations and an announcement by the U.S. Justice Department of plans to investigate the killing, Zimmerman was charged with second-degree murder.

The case went to trial in June 2013 and received massive coverage in the media, and the issues of race and racial profiling were front and center. “Zimmerman and profiling go on trial,” read one headline in USA Today. A CNN reporter described it as the case that “sparked a protest and passionate debate about race and racial profiling.” So potent was the term “racial profiling” that the trial judge granted the defense’s request that it not be allowed and ruled that only the word “profiling” could be used by the prosecution. On July 13, 2013 the jury acquitted Zimmerman of all charges, provoking a nationwide outcry. Protests were held in more than 100 cities. In her statement following the verdict, Roslyn Brock, chairman of the NAACP said, “This case has re-energized the movement to end racial profiling in the United States.” And on July 14, Patrisse Cullors, an artist, author, and educator, reposted a message about the acquittal originally posted on Facebook by activist Alicia Garcia and used the hashtag #blacklivesmatter for the first time.

In the years since #blacklivesmatter went viral, the myth of Black criminality has been under siege and the narrative communicated by the original campaign against racial profiling—that it was systemic and based on anti-Black animus—has made enormous headway in the public discourse. A public opinion survey carried out by the Washington Post in June 2020 asked: “Do you think the killing of George Floyd was an isolated incident or is a sign of broader problems in treatment of black Americans by police?” 69 percent chose the latter explanation.[19] Another poll taken during the same period found that 76 percent of Americans considered racism and discrimination a “big problem,” up from 51 percent in 2015.[20] Brittany Packnett Cunningham, co-founder of Campaign Zero,[21] explains:

Six years ago, people were not using the phrase systemic racism beyond activist circles and academic circles. And now we are in a place where it is readily on people’s lips, where folks from CEOs to grandmothers up the street are talking about it, reading about it, researching on it, listening to conversations about it.[22]

Since its birth in 2014, the Black Lives Matter movement has, in essence, accomplished what the original ACLU campaign sought to accomplish: to expose a “secret kept from most Americans and virtually from all white Americans” and to “spread this news around”—but today with the benefit of the smartphone, police body cameras, and social media.

The ability to capture not only police interactions, but also ordinary or “casual” acts of profiling and discrimination carried out by white members of the public—for example, “shopping while Black,” “jogging while Black,” and “birdwatching while Black” —and then to share the videos via different social media platforms has accelerated the narrative shift in ways that would have seemed inconceivable in 1999. In September 2020 the Center for Technology Innovation at the Brookings Institution hosted a webinar on the role of technology in support of the Black Lives Matter Movement. Dr. Rashawn Ray, a sociologist and fellow at the Brookings Institution explained that he and a group of researchers have been “collecting and curating data on social media and the Black Lives Matter movement”:

We have a large digital archive of Tweets, starting in 2014 when Michael Brown was killed, and we’ve just continued to curate those data, millions and millions of Tweets…. The way that the movement for Black lives has been able to use social media is unprecedented. Let’s go back to five or six years ago. For Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, Sandra Bland, and so many others who weren’t so fortunate as to have a hashtag, the level of public support at that time was significantly lower. People were trying to figure out Black Lives Matter. But support for the Black Lives Matter movement has significantly increased in a short period of time because people affiliated with the movement have figured out how to use social media. They’ve particularly figured out how to use social media algorithms. So, part of what happened more recently with George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and Breonna Taylor is that whether people are using hashtags on Twitter, Instagram, SnapChat, or TikTok, the algorithm loads up additional videos for people to see to show that what happened to George Floyd is not isolated. That instead, it’s part of a broader pattern of systemic racism and police brutality. Not only that—the videos also show white people behaving in similar ways, but getting treated significantly differently than Black people. And I think that’s one of the biggest things. And it’s led to this racial awakening.”

PERMIT PATTYS, BBQ BECKYS, AND KARENS: THE EVOLUTION OF RACIAL PROFILING DISCOURSE ONLINE

As the Black Lives Matter movement propelled the issue of systemic racism into global public discourse, a smaller subsection of social media content has focused specifically on the everyday profiling of people of color. The so-named “Karen” video has become a regular trending topic on popular social media channels in recent years and points to an important shift in public understanding of the issue. The proliferation of smartphones has enabled people of color to capture not only instances of racial profiling carried out by the police and other government authorities, but also everyday instances of racism perpetrated by members of the general public.

While the exact origin of the term “Karen” (and the male equivalent “Ken”) remains a topic of debate, it is generally used to describe white women who behave in an entitled, rude, or authoritative way, usually toward people of color and other traditionally marginalized groups. Beginning as a pejorative, “Karen” has evolved into a catchall to describe a broader range of entitled behaviors (and even a hairstyle), with “mask Karen” (white women caught on camera refusing to wear masks in public in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic) being the latest example of the evolution of the term. As noted by journalist Helen Lewis in her piece on the development of the term and its link to a longer history of racism and sexism in America:

One phrase above all has come to encapsulate the essence of a Karen: She is the kind of woman who asks to speak to the manager. In doing so, Karen is causing trouble for others. It is taken as read that her complaint is bogus, or at least disproportionate to the vigor with which she pursues it. The target of Karen’s entitled anger is typically presumed to be a racial minority or a working-class person, and so she is executing a covert maneuver: using her white femininity to present herself as a victim, when she is really the aggressor.[23]

The genesis of the “Karen” video and its connection to wider narratives about racial profiling are visible in social media and traditional news media. References to “Permit Patty” and “BBQ Becky” first emerged in news media coverage in 2018 as a result of several viral videos depicting Black people being confronted by white women for engaging in everyday activities. One of most widely shared videos was uploaded in April 2018 and captured Jennifer Schulte, later dubbed “BBQ Becky,” calling the police on two Black men for the offense of using a charcoal grill in a designated grilling area in Lake Merritt Park in Oakland, California. The video of the encounter, which shows Schulte being questioned by a bystander for her decision to call the police, went viral and gave way to a surge of articles and “BBQ Becky” memes (often depicting Schulte calling the police on historical Black figures). Nearly 200 articles were published in mainstream news media in 2018 alone about Jennifer Schulte and other individuals caught on video calling the police on Black people.

“Permit Patty” and “BBQ Becky” have been joined by dozens of other viral videos depicting Black people being questioned and threatened in public parks; swimming pools; or, at times, in their own apartment buildings. Between 2018 and 2020, nearly 500,000 unique social media posts were generated referring to “Karens,” “BBQ Becky,” and other popular variants. At the same time, just over 3,700 news media articles have been published on the phenomena, with some of the headlines including:

• “BBQ Becky, White Woman Who Called Cops on Black BBQ, 911 Audio Released: ‘I’m Really Scared! Come Quick!’,” Newsweek, September 4, 2018
• “What exactly is a ‘Karen’ and where did the meme come from?” BBC News, July 30, 2020
• “A Brief History of Karen,” New York Times, July 31, 2020
• “The Mythology of Karen: The meme is so powerful because of the awkward status of white women,” The Atlantic, August 24, 2020

The most recent video to go viral featured Amy Cooper in Central Park calling the police on birdwatcher Christian Cooper after he requested that she put her dog on a leash. Amy Cooper was subsequently charged with filing a false police report following widespread media coverage of the encounter. Her case was dismissed after she completed therapeutic and educational programs on racial justice.

Beyond providing a space for Black and brown Americans to document their experiences and uplift the casual and, at times, absurd manifestations of racism, “Karen” videos have resulted in several municipalities across the country passing or proposing ordinances to tackle the issues of discriminatory 911 calls. The CAREN Act (Caution Against Racially Exploitative Non-Emergencies) introduced by Shamann Walton, a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, is just one example of such measures. While online discussion of racial profiling remains overwhelmingly focused on law enforcement, an exploration of trending topics associated with racial profiling since 2018 reveals an important shift in the framing of the issue and a 98 percent increase in references to the “consequences” of racial profiling. Other notable shifts include the following:

CONCLUSION

In her book Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents, Isabel Wilkerson shows how America, now and throughout its history, has been shaped by a hidden caste system in which Black people occupy the lowest rung. She compares America to an old house in which signs of deterioration may not be visible. You may not want to investigate “what is behind this discolored patch of brick,” but “choose not to look at your own peril.” She writes, “You cannot fix a problem until and unless you can see it.” Profiling is, and has always been, one of the many tools used to maintain systemic discrimination in our country and to keep Black people “in their place.”

Racial progress in this country has been a maddeningly slow process punctuated by periods of upheaval. Decades can pass without real change, causing conditions to worsen, and then events occur that bring the festering problem into the light. Such was the televised spectacle of fire hoses and dogs being turned on nonviolent protesters in the South in the 1960s, the vicious beating of Rodney King by Los Angeles police officers in 1991, and the murder of George Floyd in 2020. The Black Lives Matter movement is carrying the campaign to end racial profiling forward by exposing its ubiquity and its dire consequences. Surveys taken in June 2020 during the massive protests following George Floyd’s murder showed that a majority of white adults supported the movement.[24] And the participation of tens of thousands of white people in protests throughout the nation was unprecedented. Along with exposure comes narrative shift. Racial profiling is real, it is wrong, and it must end.

Request Interview Transcripts

---

1 A Gallup poll released on December 9, 1999 showed that 59 percent of the public believed racial profiling was widespread, and an overwhelming 81 percent disapproved of its use by police.

2 David A. Harris, “When Success Breeds Attack: The Coming Backlash Against Racial Profiling Studies,” Michigan Journal of Race and Law, V. 6, 2001:237.

3 In August 2001, the End Racial Profiling Act was introduced in both houses but did not pass. The Act has been reintroduced virtually every year since.

4 Harris, p. 108

5 Wilkins is now a federal judge serving on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

6 Alexander and Elinson, unpublished manuscript.

7 Justice Louis Brandeis.

8 Bureau of Justice Statistics Fact Sheet: “Traffic Stop Data Collection Policies for State Police, 2004.”

9 Kelly Welch, “Black Criminal Stereotypes and Racial Profiling,” Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, Vol. 23, August 2007.

10 P. 52

11 Carroll Bogert and Lynnell Hancock, “Superpredator: The Media Myth that Demonized a Generation of Black Youth,” The Marshall Project, November 20, 2020.

12 The bill also conditioned certain federal funds to state and local law enforcement agencies on their compliance with these requirements and authorized the attorney general to provide incentive grants to assist agencies with their compliance with this Act. Finally, the bill would have required the attorney general to report to Congress 2 years after enactment of the Act and each year thereafter on racial profiling in the United States.

13 BANNING RACIAL PROFILING, Federal Document Clearing House Congressional Testimony, August 1, 2001, Wednesday.

14 “Restoring a National Consensus: The Need to End Racial Profiling in America,” The Leadership Conference, March 2011.

15 https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2002/09/05/ii-the-nation-and-911-fading-consensus-on-progress-policy/

16 David A. Harris, “Racial Profiling: Past, Present, and Future?” American Bar Association, January 21, 2020.

17 Frank R. Baumgartner, Derek A Epp, and Kelsey Shoub, Suspect Citizens: What 20 Million Traffic Stops Tell Us About Policing and Race. Cambridge University Press, 2018. The study’s conclusion: “When we look across all police agencies in the entire state, and no matter if we base our estimates of the population on census data or more refined estimates of who is driving, we see strong, consistent, and powerful evidence that black and white drivers face dramatically different odds of being pulled over.” P. 77.

18 Tallahassee Democrat.

19 https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/june-2-7-2020-washington-post-schar-poll/6b811cdf-8f99-4e28-b8f1-c76df335c16a/?itid=lk_inline_manual_2&itid=lk_inline_manual_5

20 https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_060220/

21 https://www.joincampaignzero.org/#campaign

22 Adam Serwer, “The New Reconstruction,” The Atlantic, October 2020 issue.

23 Helen Lewis, “The Mythology of Karen: The meme is so powerful because of the awkward status of white women,” The Atlantic, August 2020.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Opportunity Agenda wishes to first acknowledge the decades of activism that have led to the prominence of the movement to fully invest in healthy communities, which includes the labor and thought leadership of many Black feminists, and to thank and acknowledge the many people who contributed to the history of work and discourse, as well as to the research and writing of this report.

This report’s author is Opportunity Agenda Law & Policy Fellow I. India Thusi, Associate Professor of Law at Delaware Law School. Substantial research support was provided by: Mitch McCloy, Washington and Lee University School of Law class of 2021; Kristen Rosenthal, California Western School of Law class of 2021; and Paul Schochet, St. John’s University School of Law class of 2021. The messaging guidance was written by Julie Fisher Rowe, Director of Narrative and Engagement at The Opportunity Agenda, and Eva-Marie Malone, Director of Training and Criminal Justice at The Opportunity Agenda. Special thanks to those who contributed to the analysis, review, and editing of the report, including Eva-Marie Malone; Adam Luna, Vice President for Program, Strategy and Impact at The Opportunity Agenda. Additional thanks go to Christiaan Perez, Manager of Media Strategy, for outreach support. This report was designed and produced by Lorissa Shepstone and Gordon Clemmons of Being Wicked. Production was coordinated by Elizabeth Johnsen, Outreach and Editorial Director at The Opportunity Agenda. Sarah Wasko created the original artwork on the cover of the report. Overall guidance was provided by The Opportunity Agenda’s President, Ellen Buchman.

Finally, this research would not have been possible without the generous support of The Joyce Foundation, The Annie E. Casey Foundation, The Ford Foundation, and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. The statements made and views expressed are solely those of The Opportunity Agenda.

BEYOND POLICING – SUPPORTING #DEFUNDTHEPOLICE

We all deserve to live in communities where we feel safe. And true community safety means feeling safe from violence by the state, which includes the police.

Social inequity has systematically and institutionally permeated our country since its founding, becoming more visible at various times in our history. We are now living in one of those moments of tremendous clarity, and it calls on us to look deeply at the efficacy of the reforms and narratives which preceded it. The deadly consequences of political decisions that create health disparities are now a wound that cannot be unseen as the COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately ravages Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities. At the same moment, Americans of all backgrounds are bearing witness to the pervasive nature of racism in this country as we watch a seemingly endless stream of viral videos of police officers and white supremacist vigilantes murdering Black people.

This storm of violence, awareness, and anger about racial injustice has energized a new social justice movement to address police violence. Protesters around the world have taken to the streets chanting “Defund the Police” and “Black Lives Matter” to eradicate the ongoing threat of police violence. In light of the growing acknowledgment that policing has been an institution that compromises the safety of marginalized communities, the political will to re-imagine the very essence of community safety is growing.

Society must move beyond police and punishment when thinking about community safety, so that we can enjoy solutions and interventions that promote dignity, humanity, anti-racism, and freedom from fear.

Beyond Policing reveals that calls to enact moderate policing reforms are not backed up by a track record of success. Instead, the analysis shows why calls to defund the police open doors to new solutions, which show promise and move beyond the police and punishment. It is intended as a tool for advocates and policymakers to talk about the importance of defunding the police and investing in communities. Beyond Policing includes:

• A 13 city analysis of police departments that have adopted moderate reforms to improve policing but have nevertheless continued to engage in police violence. Our analysis provides support for the #DefundthePolice movement’s acknowledgment that it is past time to look beyond the old reforms and old ways of communicating about police reform.
• A detailed look at numerous community groups and programs that enhance community safety without relying on police involvement. These programs adopt restorative justice, community empowerment, peer mediation, and economic support to address and prevent harm. They provide concrete solutions that address the question, “If not police, then what?”
• Tips for talking about #DefundthePolice, including guidance for supporting a narrative that recognizes that the demand is realistic and needed in this moment.

WHY CALLS FOR “MODERATE POLICE REFORMS” ARE NOT ENOUGH

Advocates are calling for policymakers to #DefundthePolice because many moderate reforms, such as bans on chokeholds and the use of body-worn cameras, that are typically suggested—and often implemented— after incidents of police violence have failed to systemically transform the practice of policing.

We conducted a survey of existing police department policies in 13 cities to illustrate how these policies have not led to the elimination of pervasive police violence and discriminatory policing. We looked at the policies of the police departments in New York City; Chicago; Philadelphia; Washington, DC; San Francisco; Los Angeles; New Orleans; Miami; Atlanta; Minneapolis; Yonkers; Oklahoma City; and Milwaukee. We compared: (1) bans on chokeholds, (2) de-escalation trainings, (3) implicit bias trainings, (4) “community policing” programs, (5) civilian complaint review boards, (6) body cameras, and (7) duty to intervene and/or report.

We found that the selected police departments have adopted the vast majority of the moderate policing reforms. Every city, except Milwaukee, has adopted a ban on chokeholds.¹ Likewise, every city except for Yonkers has adopted a body-camera-wearing policy,² a de-escalation training course,³ and a duty to intervene against or report misconduct by a fellow officer.⁴

In addition, all the cities adopted implicit bias training⁵ and a community policing program.⁶ Finally, with the exception of Yonkers, each city has an independent department for complaints or civilian complaint review board to evaluate police misconduct.⁷

In sum, moderate police reform policies have already been adopted across the country.

MODERATE POLICE REFORM POLICIES HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED ACROSS THE COUNTRY

The prevalence of these policies in police departments suggests that moderate reform policies have failed to eliminate systematic police violence. Systemic racial disparities in police enforcement have continued as well. One study found African Americans were nearly three times more likely to die at the hands of police officers than white Americans.⁸ African Americans are similarly overrepresented in arrest rates. Indeed, in one study of more than 800 jurisdictions across the country, African Americans were five times more likely to be arrested.⁹ And once arrested, African Americans are, according to one study, 50 times more likely to “experience some form of force.”¹⁰ These disparities continue unabated even as departments have adopted the moderate policies that some commentators are suggesting as a response to the ongoing policing crisis.

In some cases, the civil rights violations by officers have been severe enough to require federal intervention. Specifically, cities have entered into “consent decrees” with the federal government, a court order where the city agrees to take or refrain from certain actions.¹¹ Of the cities covered by this memorandum, Chicago, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Yonkers, and Los Angeles (for the county sheriff’s department) are subject to some federal supervision.¹²

The need for federal intervention and the failure to reverse systemic disparities reveal the limits of moderate reforms. Some of the limits are practical. Implicit bias training, for instance, is helpful, but it is unlikely to change a new officer with a preexisting racial bias.¹³ Some of the limits are institutional. Duties to report and intervene when another officer is engaging in unauthorized acts of violence are helpful. Yet such requirements cannot overcome ingrained cultures of silence among officers, especially when strong police unions stand ready to fight any accusation against an officer.¹⁴ Officers in Buffalo and Chicago, for instance, were fired for reporting a fellow officer’s misconduct.¹⁵ Other limits include legal doctrines that shield officers, qualified immunity chief among them.

Yet all these policies share a common thread: they depend on officer buy-in. And officers are buying in. This resistance to reform has been pronounced with body camera requirements. According to a New York City Civilian Complaint Review Board investigation, officers would tip each other off when they had a camera on¹⁶ and in Chicago, officers often either did not wear or turn on their body cameras.¹⁷ Given these violations, it should come as no surprise that the use of body cameras has shown no statistical impact on a reduction in force.¹

Following that trend, the near-uniform ban on chokeholds across the country actually seemed to increase the use of force. In fact, a review by the New York City Civilian Complaint Review Board in 2014 found the practice on the rise.¹⁹ And this “banned” technique has caused the death of multiple victims, including Eric Garner, James Thompson, and Gerald Arthur.²⁰ The resistance to the chokehold ban has become so prevalent in Washington, DC, that city legislatures felt compelled to pass a new law to strengthen the ban.²¹

Moderate reforms have failed to curb racially disparate treatment by police across the country. These policies have been met by resistance and sabotage by the departments the policy is meant to restrain. Thus, cities should look to more systemic change to end racially disparate treatment by the police. Acting under that frame of change, Berkeley, California, recently replaced officers at traffic stops with unarmed, city employees.²² Other police departments across the country should follow Berkeley’s lead by adopting policies that look beyond police for public safety. The following chart outlines the various moderate policies that the selected police departments have already adopted. Advocates can use this chart to respond to the “Why Defund the Police?” question.

The chart below suggests that we need to move beyond the same old reforms if we want to promote true community safety.

* POST-GEORGE FLOYD’S DEATH

* Yonkers police to test body cam program for 90 days in response to the George Floyd killing. https://www.lohud.com/story/news/2020/08/17/yonkers-launch-pilot-police-body-camera-program-thursday/3376672001/.

* Philadelphia has the Philadelphia Police Advisory Commission https://www.phila.gov/departments/police-advisory-commission/.

 

LOOKING BEYOND POLICE TO PROMOTE TRUE COMMUNITY SAFETY

Below is a list of programs and organizations that look beyond policing to promote true community safety. It aims to assist advocates with addressing the question, “If no police, then what?” The techniques surveyed here include the use of violence interrupters, peacemaking circles, mobile crisis intervention systems, the use of stipends, and youth and community courts. The featured programs are illustrative of the potential of a model of community safety that redirects resources from the police to programs that aim to provide true community safety.

RESTORATIVE JUSTICE

Restorative justice organizations with violence interrupter programs employ local members from the community who have experienced violence themselves to connect with young adults to stop violence before it happens.¹¹³ Violence interrupters and other community-based outreach workers use their “personal relationships, social networks, and knowledge of their communities to dissuade specific individuals and neighborhood residents in general from engaging in violence.”¹¹⁴ After connecting with high-risk individuals, the program links youth with needed services.¹¹⁵ Organizations with this type of program include Cure Violence, Oakland Unite, the Newark Community Street Team, and the Bay Area Transformative Justice Collective. In October 2017, the John Jay College of Criminal Justice released a study of two Cure Violence programs located in the South Bronx and in Brooklyn.¹¹⁶ The study included analysis of a variety of metrics, including the reduction in social norms that support violence and violent acts. In terms of social norms, the study found that propensity to use violence in petty disputes declined by 20%.¹¹⁷ Overall, young men in neighborhoods with Cure Violence and violence interrupters reported “sharper reductions in their willingness to use violence compared with young men in similar areas without programs.”¹¹⁸

When it came to gun violence, the study found that gun injury rates fell by 50% in the Brooklyn neighborhood with Cure Violence, whereas injury rates only fell by 5% in a Brooklyn neighborhood without Cure Violence.¹¹⁹ In the area of the South Bronx with Cure Violence, gun injuries declined by 37% and shooting victimizations fell by 63%, compared with 29% and 17% in an area of Harlem without Cure Violence.¹²⁰ Overall, the study concluded that Cure Violence’s approach to violence reduction “may help to create safer and healthier communities.”¹²¹

PEACEMAKING CIRCLES

Many restorative justice organizations now use a Native American traditional approach to justice: peacemaking circles. Circles include disputants as well as their family members, friends, and other members of the community, giving them the chance to resolve the dispute but also heal relationships among those involved.¹²² A number of restorative justice organizations have a peacemaking circle program, including the Red Hook Community Justice Center, the Brownsville Community Justice Center, Philly Stands Up, Common Justice, and Men As Peacemakers.

Several qualitative studies of programs implemented in schools and by restorative justice organizations reveal the beneficial impact peacemaking circles have had on participants. For example, a study focusing on two Chicago schools that used peacemaking circles found that peace circles “effectively provide young people a nonjudgmental, safe, and trusting space to express themselves” and serve as “effective sites of social and emotional learning.”¹²³ A study of the Red Hook Community Justice Center’s peacemaking program showed more mixed results, but generally participants positively responded to the program and felt like they were making progress with the dispute.¹²⁴ Victims, however, were generally less likely to say the program had a positive impact on them.¹²⁵ Nevertheless, peacemaking circles can serve as an effective way to resolve disputes through community-led efforts.

MOBILE CRISIS CENTERS

Mobile crisis centers modeled after Eugene, Oregon’s Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets (CAHOOTS) program are promising alternatives to policing. Established in 1989, CAHOOTS is a “community-based public safety system to provide mental health first response for crises involving mental illness, homelessness, and addiction.”¹²⁶ Rather than deploy police officers, mental health specialists respond to situations to “ensure a nonviolent resolution of crisis situations.”¹²⁷ In 2019 alone, CAHOOTS responded to 24,000 calls and only requested police backup 150 times.¹²⁸ In terms of cost, CAHOOTS saves the city of Eugene around $8.5 million every year in public safety costs.¹²⁹ The CAHOOTS budget of $2.1 million is a fraction of the size of the Eugene and Springfield police departments, which have an annual budget of around $90 million.¹³⁰

Other cities have responded by implementing their own mobile crisis programs, including Portland, which just last month approved the budget for Portland Street Response.¹³¹ Organizations in other cities like Denver are currently advocating for the establishment of mobile crisis centers.¹³²

STIPENDS WITH ADVANCE PEACE

Advance Peace has implemented one of the more unique but encouraging programs to resolve gun violence that does not rely on the police. Upon learning that 70% of shootings in Richmond, California, were caused by 17 people, Advance Peace created a program to identify the most potentially lethal men, invite them to a meeting, and offer to pay them a monthly stipend of up to $1,000 for a maximum period of 9 months to attend meetings, stay out of trouble, and respond to mentoring.¹³³ Advance Peace’s founder explained the reasoning behind the stipend in a New York Times op-ed: “The social context for our prospective fellows was a laundry list of deprivation and dysfunction: high unemployment, fragmented families, inadequate education and a heavy dose of substance abuse.”¹³⁴ Compared to the massive amount of money spent on law enforcement and prisons used to respond to gun violence, the stipend is modest.¹³⁵

After 6 years of the program, 94% of the program fellows were still alive, 84% had not sustained a gun-related injury or been hospitalized for one since becoming fellows, and 79% had not been arrested or charged for gun-related activity since becoming fellows.¹³⁶ After just the first year of the program, Richmond homicides fell by half, from 45 to 22.¹³⁷

YOUTH AND COMMUNITY COURTS

Community courts are part of a larger “problem-solving courts” movement that “seeks to prevent crime by directly addressing its underlying causes” rather than simply relying on punishment to address social issues.¹³⁸ The nation’s first community court was established in Manhattan in 1993 as a way to relocate justice from courts to the local community, aiming to encourage communities to enforce social norms, and now there are at least 70 community courts around the world.¹³⁹ Distinguishing features of community courts include individualized justice through wider access to information about defendants, expanded sentencing options, varying mandate length, offender accountability, community engagement, and community impact.¹⁴⁰ Community courts, unlike other problem-solving courts, do not specialize in one particular problem like drugs, mental health, or domestic violence.

In November 2013, the National Center for State Courts released an extensive evaluation of the Red Hook Community Center’s community court in Brooklyn. The study found that adult misdemeanor offenders who went through the community court were to a “statistically significant degree less likely to become recidivists” than adult misdemeanor offenders in a control group.¹⁴¹ The probability of rearrests for offenders that went through the community court reduced by 10%.¹⁴² In addition, although the study could not definitively conclude that there was a causal relationship between the opening of the Community Center and a reduction in local arrests, there were “sharp decreases in the levels of both felony and misdemeanor arrests in the catchment area precincts” when the Center opened.¹⁴³ Overall, the study concluded that “the community court model can indeed reduce crime and help to strengthen neighborhoods” and “the practice of procedural justice in interactions with individual representatives of the justice system…comprise[s] highly effective criminal justice policies.”¹⁴⁴

THE COMMUNITY COURT MODEL CAN INDEED REDUCE CRIME AND HELP STRENGTHEN NEIGHBORHOODS

This evaluation of one particular community court falls in line with the results of other studies including an Urban Institute report conducted in 2002. This report focused on youth teen courts in Alaska, Missouri, Arizona, and Maryland and concluded that “teen courts represent a promising alternative for the juvenile justice system” after finding that youth who were sent to teen court were less likely to re-offend than youth in comparison groups.¹⁴⁵ Nevertheless, community courts should not be used to expand the reach of the criminal system, nor should they be the primary basis for providing social welfare services. Instead, they should be viewed as an alternative when interaction with the criminal system would otherwise be required.

When it comes to community safety and justice, no one size fits all: each community’s needs are unique and each responds differently to efforts to resolve complicated issues like violence. However, there are effective alternative ways to improve community safety that do not involve the police. The programs outlined here reveal the powerful impact that restorative justice methods can have on communities in terms of both their ability to directly address issues like violence and their potential to strengthen communities as a whole by relying on community members to serve as active participants in community safety.

…THERE ARE EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE WAYS TO IMPROVE COMMUNITY SAFETY THAT DO NOT INVOLVE THE POLICE.

SHIFTING TO A NARRATIVE ABOUT TRUE COMMUNITY SAFETY

The Opportunity Agenda believes that any conversation about policing practices must start with the aspiration to redefine safety and for communities that can live without fear. Below is a guide to shifting to a narrative about true community safety and away from one rooted in state violence.

1. Lead with a Positive Vision and Shared Values.

The Opportunity Agenda’s past analysis shows that commentators are often divided about how they discuss criminal justice issues. Uplifting the values that you share with different audiences will allow them to “hear” what you’re saying. Most communicators agree: people don’t change their minds based on facts alone, but rather based on how those facts are framed to fit their emotions and values.

Share a clear and inspiring vision. In many cases, audiences have a difficult time envisioning what a different system would look like. Offer a vision that both shows how a new approach will uphold our values and what that could concretely look like. What would it look like to have first responders who were unarmed mental health specialists work with those experiencing a crisis in public? How would it be different for those experiencing homelessness if they had an ongoing relationship with a trained social worker instead of periodic encounters with police? Paint a clear picture for audiences that shows what defunding looks like and how it benefits the larger community while also protecting those most currently affected by problematic policing policies.

Be prepared to answer tough questions, but don’t dwell on them. Many who are opposed to the idea of defunding the police, or who don’t fully understand the vision it represents, will start with the toughest questions: “What happens when someone is murdered?” “How should we handle school shooters?” and so on. It’s important to have a strategy for these questions and to not appear to dodge them. Then, you can move on to the larger part of the argument that affects far more people: what the country would look like with more and better mental health services, enough affordable housing and robust anti-homelessness programs, and well-funded schools, for instance.

Evoke shared values. Some values to engage audiences in conversations about policing include:

• Equal Justice—the assurance that what you look like, the accent you have, or how much money you make should not affect the treatment you receive in our justice system. Current disparities in the application of laws violate this value, and the emphasis on policing and punishment has contributed heavily to these disparities.
• Community—the notion that we share responsibility for each other and that opportunity is not only about personal success but about our success as a people. Define what a truly healthy and safe community looks like and remind audiences that we can use the resources we expend on policing to promote our shared values by enhancing health and education and protecting family.
• True Community Safety—the belief that we all want to live in communities where our family and property are safe. We should work toward communities where all individuals feel safe and paint a picture of what that can look like and what steps will get us there.
• Voice—the idea that we should all have a say in the decisions that affect us and our communities.
• Basic Rights/Human Rights—the guarantee of dignity and fairness we all deserve by virtue of our humanity, some of which are also itemized in the Constitution.

2. Clearly identify and describe the problem. Emphasize how police violence undermines community safety.

The violence that police inflict upon Black and Brown communities is often unreported and uncounted but nevertheless very dangerous for these communities. This everyday violence may take the form of aggressive searches and verbal abuse on the streets, and it is often overlooked in crime statistics that police officials use to argue that we should rely on police to redress community harms. Remind your audience that the police themselves have undermined safety in many communities through acts of everyday violence that is often unrecorded and without witnesses.

3. Communicate that reforms that fail to name the harms of racial discrimination, namely anti-Black racism, perpetuate the status quo.

The centrality of racism to police violence is apparent, and policymakers should address this issue directly. Adopting colorblind reforms and language that fail to name racism will only continue to exacerbate the racist outcomes that persist in policing. It is time to have the tough conversation about racism in policing and to look for solutions that deal with it head on.

4. Discuss the overreliance on punitive responses to social problems.

Remind your readers about the harms of this country’s overreliance on incarceration and policing to address social issues. Emphasize that there are alternatives for addressing social issues that don’t involve punishment and incarceration, both of which can separate families, punish people for being poor, and come with collateral consequences that keep people from voting and living in public housing after they have been incarcerated.

5. Highlight the failures of moderate reforms that allow police departments to operate as business as usual.

The Opportunity Agenda has provided charts that advocates can use to illustrate the need for transformative demands that move beyond the minor reforms of the past that have been ineffective or moderately successful. Many of these reforms direct more public dollars into the nation’s police departments.

6. Provide solutions that go beyond policing to achieve community safety.

Tell people what works. Put forward specific goals and solutions and show how they support the larger vision.

Talk about the need to re-examine our laws. What should be de-criminalized and what does that look like? How can our laws be fair, be fairly enforced, and lead to true safety?

The Opportunity Agenda chart on effective alternatives to policing (page 10) provides community programs that may serve as examples for thinking about a world that looks beyond police for community safety. Advocates can use this chart to respond to questions about how to provide safety while taking resources away from the police.

7. Be cautious when discussing data and statistics.

Make sure to frame racial disparities in statistics and data as caused by systemic obstacles to equal opportunity and equal justice. For some audiences, disparities that are not properly framed as the result of systemic obstacles may only reinforce racist views that those audiences already had about why those disparities exist. Explain how systemic biases affect all of us and prevent us from achieving our full potential as a country. We can never truly become a land of opportunity while we allow racial inequity to persist. And ensuring equal opportunity for all is in our shared interest.

8. Redefine the notion of community safety.

Don’t shy away from conversations about safety. #DefundthePolice is about providing safety for everyone and doing so in a manner that respects everyone’s rights and dignity. It’s about well-resourced communities that feel empowered. The goal is to achieve True Community Safety that is centered on empowering communities rather than punishing them.

9. Don’t forget the importance of staying intersectional.

It’s important to keep the conversation intersectional. At times, there can be a tendency to only focus on Black men and boys when talking about police violence. But it’s important to remind your audiences that Black women and girls have experienced unique harms from police violence in this country, as have Black trans people, indigenous women, and others. In addition, people with disabilities, mental health issues, and other communities that have experience with systemic discrimination should remain a part of the conversation.

10. Emphasize the uniqueness of this moment, and invite audiences to imagine a world that matches our values as a society.

We are at a unique moment of our history. Now is the time for us to use our imagination to create the world we would like to see.

BONUS

Call out the fear-based narratives that our opponents will use to undermine the movement.

The call to #DefundthePolice is a call to fundamentally shift power from the police to the community. It is a radical demand, and advocates should expect strong opposition to it. Some of the opposition may come through direct responses to the demand. But much of the opposition will likely come through the manipulation of crime statistics, threats that the police will not enforce the law, and other indirect tactics to stoke fear. Call out these fear-based tactics and narratives for what they are. Remind your audiences that #DefundthePolice is about providing True Community Safety.

VPSA: VALUES, PROBLEMS, SOLUTIONS, ACTION

Value

We all deserve to live in communities where we feel safe. And true community safety means being safe from violence from members of the government, including the police.

Problem

Americans have witnessed the pervasive nature of racism in this country from the steady stream of videos of police officers and vigilantes murdering Black people. These videos demonstrate that racism permeates policing and cannot be addressed by tinkering with the system.

Solution

It’s time for policymakers to defund the police and readjust local budgets to provide resources back to the communities. In NYC, the New York City Council should reallocate $1 billion from the NYPD budget to education, healthcare, and social services for the city’s low-income communities.

Action

Call your city council representative.

REFERENCES

Mariame Kaba, Yes, We Literally Mean Abolish the Police, The New York Times

• Suggesting community care workers replace officers when responding to mental health checks as well as recommending restorative justice groups.

Mariame Kaba and Shira Hassan, Fumbling Towards Repair

• A workbook on facilitating restorative justice groups.

Mariame Kaba and Kelly Hayes, A Jailbreak of the Imagination: Seeing Prisons for What They Truly Are and Demanding Transformation, Truthout.org

• Discusses how rhetoric in response to prison abolition sometimes demands answers for the most extreme cases that there is not necessarily an answer to instead of the vast majority of cases, and how advocates should not feel pressured to answer those questions and should continue to critique the current system.
• “Questions like, ‘what about the really dangerous people?’ are not questions a prison abolitionist must answer in order to insist the prison industrial complex must be undone. These are questions we must collectively answer, even as we trouble the very notion of ‘dangerousness.’ The inability to offer a neatly packaged and easily digestible solution does not preclude offering critique or analysis of the ills of our current system.”

Mariame Kaba, Free Us All: Participatory defense campaigns as abolitionist organizing, The New Inquiry

• Highlighting the importance of defense campaigns as a part of the abolitionist movement, especially for advocating for the freedom of survivors of gender-based violence. Includes a helpful list of ideas to keep in mind when organizing.

Ruth Wilson Gilmore, Golden Gulag: Prisons, Surplus, Crisis, and Opposition in Globalizing California

• Outlines the dilemma of the Prison Industrial Complex (PIC) in California and how California criminal justice policies were fueled in part by the PIC.

Amna K. Akbar, Toward a Radical Reimagination of Law, 93 New York University Law Review 405 (2018)

• Discussing how the police provides the “armed protection of state interests” and that the law allows for more racialized police violence. Professor Akbar argues that legal scholars should imagine change beyond the current legal bounds, influenced by the social movements driving the change that should be centered.

Allegra McLeod, Developments in the Law: Envisioning Abolition Democracy, 132 Harvard Law Review 1613 (2019)

Allegra McLeod, Prison Abolition and Grounded Justice, 62 UCLA Law Review 1156 (2015)

• Explaining that abolition is less about physically tearing down prisons and is more focused on abolishing the culture of racialized punishment.
• Discussing abolition as a positive and a negative project.

Charlotte Rosen, Abolition or Bust: Liberal Prison Reform as an Engine of Carceral Violence, The Abusable Past

• Explaining why liberal policing reform is harmful from a historical context, branching off of work by Naomi Murakawa’s The First Civil Right.

K. Agbebiyi, Sarah T. Hamid, Rachel Kuo, and Mon Mohapatra, Abolition Cannot Wait: Visions for Transformation and Radical World-Building, WEAR YOUR VOICE

• Discussing the many issues that abolition affects, including anti-white supremacy, anti-capitalism, and anti-imperialism.

INCITE! Community Accountability page.
https://incite-national.org/community-accountability/

Transformharm.org Abolition page generally.
https://transformharm.org/abolition/

---

1 Monika Evstatieva & Tim Mak, How Decades of Bans on Police Chokeholds Have Fallen Short, NPR (June 16, 2020), https://www.npr.org/2020/06/16/877527974/how-decades-of-bans-on-police-chokeholds-have-fallen-short; Jodie Fleischer & Rick Yarborough, DC Police Banned Neck Restraints Years Ago; Council Wants to Make Law Clear, NBC Washington, https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/dc-police-banned-neck-restraints-years-ago-council-wants-to-make-law-clear/2326479/; Nicholas Iovin, San Francisco Police Sue Over City’s Chokehold Ban. Courthouse News Service (Dec. 27, 2016), https://www.courthousenews.com/san-francisco-police-sue-over-citys-chokehold-ban/; Atlanta passes ban on police chokeholds, empowers citizen review board. News Break (June 6, 2020), https://www.newsbreak.com/georgia/atlanta/news/0PWvAnaK/atlanta-passes-ban-on-police-chokeholds-empowers-citizen-review-board; New Orleans Police Department Operation Manual, available at https://www.nola.gov/getattachment/NOPD/NOPD-Consent-Decree/Chapter-1-3-Use-of-Force.pdf/; Oklahoma Police Department policies, available at https://www.okc.gov/home/showdocument?id=17431; Governor Cuomo Signs Legislation Requiring New York State Police Officers to Wear Body Cameras and Creating the Law Enforcement Misconduct Investigative Office, Yonkers Tribune (June 16, 2020), https://www.yonkerstribune.com/2020/06/governor-cuomo-signs-legislation-requiring-new-york-state-police-officers-to-wear-bodycameras-and-creating-the-law-enforcement-misconduct-investigative-office; Skyler Swisher, Miami-Dade Police Department bans chokeholds, Sun Sentinel (June 11, 2020), https://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/miami-dade/fl-ne-miami-dade-neck-restraints-banned-20200611-xzpcv5m2j5dhndnl5t2onmhd7e-story.html.

2 Christina Carrega, Some NYPD officers tip each other off when body cameras are on: watchdog report. ABC (Feb. 27, 2020), https://abcnews.go.com/US/nypd-officers-tip-off-body-cameraswatchdog-report/story?id=69254245; Megan Hickey, How Often Do Chicago Police Officers Fail To Activate Their Body Cameras? It’s Hard To Know, CBS Chicago (July 30, 2019), https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/07/30/inspector-general-chicago-police-body-cameras/; Samantha Melamed, What happens when Philly police get body cameras—but don’t turn them on? The Philadelphia Inquirer (July 15, 2020), https://www.inquirer.com/news/philadelphia-police-body-worn-cameras-commissioner-richard-ross-20190709.html; MPD and Body-Worn Cameras. DC.gov, https://mpdc.dc.gov/page/bwc; Megan Cassidy, San Francisco police turned off body cameras before illegal raid on journalist, memo says, San Francisco Chronicle (June 18, 2020), https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/San-Francisco-police-turned-off-body-cameras-15349795.php; LAPD Body-Worn Cameras, ACLU, https://www.aclusocal.org/en/campaigns/lapd-body-worn-cameras; Martin Kaste, New Orleans’ Police Use of Body Cameras Brings Benefits and New Burdens, NPR (Mar. 3, 2017), https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/03/03/517930343/new-orleans-police-use-of-body-cameras-brings-benefits-and-new-burdens; Body Worn Camera Program, Miami Police (2013), https://www.miami-police.org/virtual_policing_unit.html; Equipment and Supplies Policy, available at http://www2.minneapolismn.gov/police/policy/mpdpolicy_4-200_4-200; Body-Worn Cameras, OKC.gov, https://www.okc.gov/government/social-justice/justice-and-the-law/body-worn-camera-pilot-program; Atlanta Police Department Policy Manual, available at https://www.atlantapd.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=3243; Ashley Luther, What you need to know about Milwaukee police body cameras, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (May 23, 2018), https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/crime/2018/05/23/what-you-need-know-milwaukee-police-body-cameras/635072002/.

3 Specialized Training Section, New York City Police Department, https://www1.nyc.gov/site/nypd/bureaus/administrative/training-specialized.page; Annie Sweeney, Chicago police rolling out new, mandatory “de-escalation” training, Chicago Tribune (Sep. 17, 2016), https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-chicago-police-training-met-20160916-story.html; George Fachner & Steven Carter, Collaborative Reform Initiative: An Assessment of Deadly Force in the Philadelphia Police Department, Philadelphia Police Department https://www.phillypolice.com/assets/directives/cops-w0753-pub.pdf; Metropolitan Police Department Recognizes Crisis Intervention Officer of the Year, DC.gov, https://dbh.dc.gov/release/metropolitan-police-department-recognizes-crisis-intervention-officer-year; Improving our response to crises involving the mentally ill. San Francisco Police Department (July 15, 2020), https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/your-sfpd/explore-department/crisis-intervention-team-cit; Community Inquiries on LAPD Training and Practice, The Los Angeles Police Department, http://www.lapdonline.org/police_commission/content_basic_view/66647; Ambria Washington, In 2016, NOPD Prioritized De-Escalation Training for New and Veteran Officers, NOPD News (Dec. 13, 2016), https://nopdnews.com/post/december-2016/in-2016,-nopd-prioritized-de-escalation-training-f/; De-escalation in High Risk Tactics, Miami Dade College, https://www.mdc.edu/justice/training-programs/training-de-escalation-high-risk-tactics.aspx; Atlanta Police Training Academy, available at https://citycouncil.atlantaga.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=340; Minneapolis Recruitment and Training, available at http://www2.minneapolismn.gov/police/policy/mpdpolicy_2-500_2-500; Police Chief Wade Gourley, OKC.gov, https://www.okc.gov/departments/police/about-us/meet-the-chief-of-police; Recommendations. City of Milwaukee, https://city.milwaukee.gov/fpc/Collaborative-Reform-Process/Chapter-5-Use-of-Force-and-Deadly-Force-Practices/Recommendation-15.1.htm.

4 Emma Ockerman, More Police Departments Are Adopting “Duty to Intervene” Policies. But They Didn’t Save George Floyd. Vice (June 5, 2020), https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/m7jvkxmore-police-departments-are-adopting-duty-to-intervene-policies-but-they-didnt-save-george-floyd; Bernard Condon & Todd Richmond, Duty to intervene: Floyd cops spoke up but didn’t step in, Associated Press (June 7, 2020), https://apnews.com/0d52f8accbbdab6a29b781d75e9aeb01; Chicago Police Department Use of Force Policy, available at https://home.chicagopolice.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/G03-02_Use-of-Force_TBD.pdf; Philadelphia Police Department Use of Force Policy, available at https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56996151cbced68b170389f4/t/569adf51d8af100e8508cf64/1452990313758/Philadelphia+less+lethal+force.pdf; Police Complaints Board Releases Report on D.C. Police Officers’ Duty to Intervene, DC.gov (Aug. 28, 2019), https://policecomplaints.dc.gov/release/police-complaints-board-releases-report-dc-police-officers%E2%80%99-duty-intervene; San Francisco Police Department General Order on Use of Force, available at https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/Documents/PoliceDocuments/DepartmentGeneralOrders/DGO%205.01%20Use%20of%20Force%20(Rev.%2012-21-16)_0.pdf; Volume 1 of LAPD Manual, available at http://www.lapdonline.org/lapd_manual/volume_1.htm; A Newsletter Of The Police Executive Research Forum, Police Executive Research Forum (July–Sept. 2016), https://www.policeforum.org/assets/docs/Subject_to_Debate/Debate2016/debate_2016_julsep.pdf; Miami-Dade Police Department releases letter to community amid protests, Local10.com (June 8, 2020), https://www.local10.com/news/local/2020/06/08/miami-dade-police-department-releases-letter-to-community-amid-protests/; Atlanta Police Training Academy, supra note 3; Lauren Daniels, Oklahoma City Police respond to nationwide “8 Can’t Wait” campaign, Oklahoma’s News 4 (June 15, 2020), https://kfor.com/news/oklahoma-city-police-respond-to-nationwide-8-cant-wait-campaign/; Amanda St. Hilaire, What Milwaukee police policies really say (and why it matters), Fox 6 Now (June 22, 2020), https://fox6now.com/2020/06/22/what-milwaukee-police-policies-really-say-and-why-it-matters/.

5 Seth Barron, Explicit Danger, City Journal (Aug. 29, 2019), https://www.city-journal.org/implicit-bias-training; Debbie Southorn & Sarah Lazare, Officers Accused of Abuses Are Leading Chicago Police’s “Implicit Bias” Training Program, The Intercept (Feb. 3, 2019), https://theintercept.com/2019/02/03/chicago-police-procedural-justice-training-complaints-lawsuits-racism/; Kelly Cofrancisco, Breaking down the FY21 Philadelphia Police Department’s proposed budget, City of Philadelphia (June 5, 2020), https://www.phila.gov/2020-06-05-breaking-down-the-fy21-philadelphiapolice-departments-proposed-budget/; Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) Academy Sessions, Georgetown Law, https://www.law.georgetown.edu/innovative-policing-program/metropolitanpolice-department-mpd-academy-sessions/; New Orleans Police Department Operations Manual, available at https://www.nola.gov/getattachment/NOPD/Policies/Bias-Free.pdf/; Bias-Free Policing, San Francisco Police Department (updated July 15, 2020), https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/your-sfpd/policies/bias-free-policing; Volume 1 of LAPD Manual, supra note 4; Candice Wang, Can implicit bias training help cops overcome racism? Popular Science (June 16, 2020), https://www.popsci.com/story/science/implicit-bias-training-police-racism-black-lives-matter/; Atlanta Police Training Academy, supra note 3; Riham Feshir, Minneapolis budgets $300,000 for police bias training, MPR News (Dec. 10, 2015), https://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/12/10/mpls-policebias-training; Council Majority Leader Pineda-Isaac: Repeal 50a and Body Cameras for the YPD, Yonkers Times (June 13, 2020), http://yonkerstimes.com/council-majority-leader-pineda-isaacrepeal-50a-and-body-cameras-for-the-ypd/; Matt Dinger, Oklahoma City officers take long look at themselves and citizens in bias training class, The Oklahoman (Dec. 27, 2016), https://oklahoman.com/article/5531923/oklahoma-city-officers-take-long-look-at-themselves-and-citizens-in-bias-training-class.

6 Neighborhood Policing, New York City Police Department, https://www1.nyc.gov/site/nypd/bureaus/patrol/neighborhood-coordination-officers.page; Chicago Police Department Strategic Plan, available at https://home.chicagopolice.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Chicago-Police-Department-Strategic-Plan-Plan-2019-January.pdf; Philadelphia Police Collaborative Reform Initiative, available at https://www.phillypolice.com/assets/directives/cops-w0792-pub.pdf; MPD Community Outreach, DC.gov, https://mpdc.dc.gov/page/communityoutreach; Community Policing Strategic Plan, San Francisco Police Department (updated July 15, 2020), https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/your-sfpd/policies/community-policing-strategic-plan; Community Policing Unit, The Los Angeles Police Department, http://www.lapdonline.org/support_lapd/content_basic_view/731; New Orleans Police Department Community Engagement Manual, available at https://www.nola.gov/getattachment/NOPD/NOPD-Consent-Decree/Community-Engagement-Manual-(3).pdf/; Community Policing, Crime Prevention, and Juvenile Programs Evaluation by Miami-Dade Police Department, available at https://www.miamidade.gov/police/library/community-policing.pdf; Reginald Moorman, Community Policing Programs, Atlanta Police Department, https://www.atlantapd.org/services/community-services/community-policing-programs; Minneapolis Community-Oriented Policing and Community Relations Training, available at http://www2.minneapolismn.gov/police/policy/mpdpolicy_6-300_6-300; Yonkers Police Department Public Opinion Survey 2017, available at https://www.yonkersny.gov/home/showdocument?id=16846; Community Programs, okc.gov, https://www.okc.gov/departments/police/community-programs; Office of Community Outreach & Education, Milwaukee Police Department, https://city.milwaukee.gov/police/MPD-Divisions/Community-Outreach-Education.htm.

7 Complaints, NYC, https://www1.nyc.gov/site/ccrb/complaints/complaints.page; Civilian Office of Policy Accountability; City of Chicago, https://www.chicago.gov/city/en/depts/copa.html; About Office of Police Complaints, DC.gov, https://policecomplaints.dc.gov/page/about-office-police-complaints; Department of Police Accountability, available at https://sfgov.org/dpa/; Mark Puente, All-civilian panels could review LAPD misconduct cases starting June 13, Los Angeles Times (June 4, 2019), https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-police-commission-officer-board-of-rightsdiscipline-20190604-story.html; New Orleans Independent Police Monitor, available at http://nolaipm.gov/history/; Civilian Investigative Panel (CIP), MIAMI, https://www.miamigov.com/Government/Departments-Organizations/Civilian-Investigative-Panel-CIP; Atlanta Citizen Review Board, available at https://acrbgov.org/; OKCPD Citizens Advisory Board, okc.gov, https://www.okc.gov/departments/police/about-us/citizens-advisory-board; Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission, available at https://city.milwaukee.gov/fpc/About.

8 Sarah DeGue, Katherine Fowler, & Cynthia Calkins, Deaths due to use of lethal force by law enforcement: Findings from the National Violent Death Reporting System, 17 U.S. States 2009–2012. Am J Prev Med. 2016 Nov; 51(5 Suppl 3): S173–S187, available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/.

9 Pierre Thomas, John Kelly, & Tonya Simpson, ABC News analysis of police arrests nationwide reveals stark racial disparity, ABC (June 11, 2020), https://abcnews.go.com/US/abc-news-analysis-police-arrests-nationwide-reveals-stark/story?id=71188546.

10 Roland G. Fryer J., An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force, Journal of Political Economy (2017), available at https://www.nber.org/papers/w22399.pdf.

11 See DECREE, Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).

12 The Department of Justice’s Interactive Guide to the Civil Rights Division’s Police Reforms, available at https://www.justice.gov/crt/page/file/922456/download; Chicago Police Consent Decree, available at http://chicagopoliceconsentdecree.org/resources/; Aaron Mosselle, ACLU: New stop-and-frisk numbers “not what people of Philadelphia deserve,” Whyy (Apr. 28, 2020), https://whyy.org/articles/aclu-new-stop-and-frisk-numbers-not-what-people-of-philadelphia-deserve/.

13 Michael Hobbes, “Implicit Bias” Trainings Don’t Actually Change Police Behavior, HUFFPOST (Updated June 15, 2020), https://www.huffpost.com/entry/implicit-bias-training-doesnt-actually-change-police-behavior_n_5ee28fc3c5b60b32f010ed48.

14 Cf. Douglas Belkin, Kris Maher, & Deanna Paul, Clout of Minneapolis Police Union Boss Reflects National Trend, The Wall Street Journal (July 7, 2020), https://www.wsj.com/articles/robert-krolls-rise-from-barroom-brawler-to-minneapolis-police-union-boss-11594159577?mod=hp_lead_pos5.

15 Justin Sondel & Hannah Knowles, George Floyd died after officers didn’t step in. These police say they did—and paid a price, The Washington Post (June 12, 2020), https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/10/police-culture-duty-to-intervene/.

16 Christina Carrega, supra note 2.

17 Megan Hickey, supra note 2.

18 Ethan Zuckerman, Why filming police violence has done nothing to stop it, MIT Technology Review (June 3, 2020). https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/06/03/1002587/sousveillance-george-floyd-police-body-cams/.

19 Monika Evstatieva & Tim Mak, supra note 1.

20 Id.

21 Jodie Fleischer & Rick Yarborough, supra note 1.

22 Summer Lin, California city votes to remove cops from traffic stops, aims to slash police budget, Miami Herald (July 14, 2020), https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article244221592.html.

23 For a discussion of violations of the reform-policies by police departments, see accompanying memorandum.

24 Monika Evstatieva & Tim Mak, How Decades of Bans on Police Chokeholds Have Fallen Short, NPR (June 16, 2020), https://www.npr.org/2020/06/16/877527974/how-decades-of-bans-on-police-chokeholds-have-fallen-short.

25 Christina Carrega, Some NYPD officers tip each other off when body cameras are on: watchdog report, ABC (Feb. 27, 2020), https://abcnews.go.com/US/nypd-officers-tip-off-body-cameras-watchdog-report/story?id=69254245.

26 Specialized Training Section, New York City Police Department, https://www1.nyc.gov/site/nypd/bureaus/administrative/training-specialized.page.

27 Seth Barron, Explicit Danger, City Journal (Aug. 29, 2019), https://www.city-journal.org/implicit-bias-training.

28 Neighborhood Policing, New York City Police Department, https://www1.nyc.gov/site/nypd/bureaus/patrol/neighborhood-coordination-officers.page.

29 Complaints, NYC, https://www1.nyc.gov/site/ccrb/complaints/complaints.page

30 Emma Ockerman, More Police Departments Are Adopting “Duty to Intervene” Policies. But They Didn’t Save George Floyd, Vice (June 5, 2020), https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/m7jvkx/more-police-departments-are-adopting-duty-to-intervene-policies-but-they-didnt-save-george-floyd.

31 Monika Evstatieva & Tim Mak, supra note 57.

32 Megan Hickey, How Often Do Chicago Police Officers Fail To Activate Their Body Cameras? It’s Hard To Know, CBS Chicago (July 30, 2019), https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/07/30/inspector-general-chicago-police-body-cameras/.

33 Annie Sweeney, Chicago police rolling out new, mandatory “de-escalation” training, Chicago Tribune (Sep. 17, 2016), https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-chicago-police-training-met-20160916-story.html.

34 Debbie Southorn & Sarah Lazare, Officers Accused of Abuses Are Leading Chicago Police’s “Implicit Bias” Training Program, The Intercept (Feb. 3, 2019), https://theintercept.com/2019/02/03/chicago-police-procedural-justice-training-complaints-lawsuits-racism/.

35 Chicago Police Department Strategic Plan, available at https://home.chicagopolice.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Chicago-Police-Department-Strategic-Plan-Plan-2019-January.pdf.

36 Civilian Office of Policy Accountability, City of Chicago, https://www.chicago.gov/city/en/depts/copa.html.

37 Chicago Police Department Use of Force Policy, available at https://home.chicagopolice.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/G03-02_Use-of-Force_TBD.pdf.

38 Chicago Police Consent Decree, available at http://chicagopoliceconsentdecree.org/resources/.

39 Monika Evstatieva & Tim Mak, supra note 57.

40 Samantha Melamed, What happens when Philly police get body cameras—but don’t turn them on? The Philadelphia Inquirer (July 15, 2020), https://www.inquirer.com/news/philadelphia-police-body-worn-cameras-commissioner-richard-ross-20190709.html.

41 George Fachner & Steven Carter, Collaborative Reform Initiative An Assessment of Deadly Force in the Philadelphia Police Department, Philadelphia Police Department, https://www.phillypolice.com/assets/directives/cops-w0753-pub.pdf.

42 Kelly Cofrancisco, Breaking down the FY21 Philadelphia Police Department’s proposed budget, City of Philadelphia (June 5, 2020), https://www.phila.gov/2020-06-05-breaking-down-the-fy21-philadelphia-police-departments-proposed-bud get/.

43 Philadelphia Police Collaborative Reform Initiative, available at https://www.phillypolice.com/assets/directives/cops-w0792-pub.pdf; MPD Community Outreach, DC.gov, https://mpdc.dc.gov/page/communityoutreach.

44 Philadelphia Police Department Use of Force Policy, available at https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56996151cbced68b170389f4/t/569adf51d8af100e8508cf64/14529903 13758/Philadelphia+less+lethal+force.pdf.

45 Aaron Mosselle, ACLU: New stop-and-frisk numbers “not what people of Philadelphia deserve,” Whyy (Apr. 28, 2020), https://whyy.org/articles/aclu-new-stop-and-frisk-numbers-not-what-people-of-philadelphia-deserve/.

46 Jodie Fleischer & Rick Yarborough, DC Police Banned Neck Restraints Years Ago; Council Wants to Make Law Clear, NBC Washington, https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/dc-police-banned-neck-restraints-years-ago-council-wants-to-make-law-clear/2326479/.

47 MPD and Body-Worn Cameras, DC.gov., https://mpdc.dc.gov/page/bwc.

48 Metropolitan Police Department Recognizes Crisis Intervention Officer of the Year, DC.gov, https://dbh.dc.gov/release/metropolitan-police-department-recognizes-crisis-intervention-officer-year.

49 Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) Academy Sessions, Georgetown Law, https://www.law.georgetown.edu/innovative-policing-program/metropolitan-police-department-mpd-academy-sessions/.

50 MPD Community Outreach, DC.gov, https://mpdc.dc.gov/page/communityoutreach.

51 About Office of Police Complaints, DC.gov, https://policecomplaints.dc.gov/page/about-office-police-complaints.

52 Police Complaints Board Releases Report on D.C. Police Officers’ Duty to Intervene, DC.gov (Aug. 28, 2019), https://policecomplaints.dc.gov/release/police-complaints-board-releases-report-dc-police-officers%E2%80 %99-duty-intervene.

53 Nicholas Iovin, San Francisco Police Sue Over City’s Chokehold Ban, Courthouse News Service (Dec. 27, 2016), https://www.courthousenews.com/san-francisco-police-sue-over-citys-chokehold-ban/.

54 Megan Cassidy, San Francisco police turned off body cameras before illegal raid on journalist, memo says, San Francisco Chronicle (June 18, 2020), https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/San-Francisco-police-turned-off-body-cameras-15349795.php.

55 Improving our response to crises involving the mentally ill, San Francisco Police Department (July 15, 2020), https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/your-sfpd/explore-department/crisis-intervention-team-cit.

56 Bias-Free Policing, San Francisco Police Department (updated July 15, 2020), https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/your-sfpd/policies/bias-free-policing.

57 Community Policing Strategic Plan, San Francisco Police Department (updated July 15, 2020), https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/your-sfpd/policies/community-policing-strategic-plan.

58 Department of Police Accountability, available at https://sfgov.org/dpa/.

59 San Francisco Police Department General Order on Use of Force, available at https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/Documents/PoliceDocuments/DepartmentGeneralOrders/DGO%205.01%20Use%20of%20Force%20(Rev.%2012-21-16)_0.pdf.

60 Monika Evstatieva & Tim Mak, supra note 57.

61 LAPD Body-Worn Cameras, ACLU, https://www.aclusocal.org/en/campaigns/lapd-body-worn-cameras.

62 Community Inquiries on LAPD Training and Practice, The Los Angeles Police Department, http://www.lapdonline.org/police_commission/content_basic_view/66647.

63 Volume 1 of LAPD Manual, available at http://www.lapdonline.org/lapd_manual/volume_1.htm.

64 Community Policing Unit, The Los Angeles Police Department, http://www.lapdonline.org/support_lapd/content_basic_view/731.

65 Mark Puente, All-civilian panels could review LAPD misconduct cases starting June 13, Los Angeles Times (June 4, 2019), https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-police-commission-officer-board-of-rights-discipline-2019060 4-story.html.

66 Volume 1 of LAPD Manual, supra note 96.

67 The Department of Justice’s Interactive Guide to the Civil Rights Division’s Police Reforms, available at https://www.justice.gov/crt/page/file/922456/download.

68 New Orleans Police Department Operations Manual, available at https://www.nola.gov/getattachment/NOPD/NOPD-Consent-Decree/Chapter-1-3-Use-of-Force.pdf/.

69 Martin Kaste, New Orleans’ Police Use of Body Cameras Brings Benefits and New Burdens, NPR (Mar. 3, 2017), https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/03/03/517930343/new-orleans-police-use-of-body-ca meras-brings-benefits-and-new-burdens.

70 Ambria Washington, In 2016, NOPD Prioritized De-Escalation Training for New and Veteran Officers, NOPD News (Dec. 13, 2016), https://nopdnews.com/post/december-2016/in-2016,-nopd-prioritized-de-escalation-training-f/.

71 New Orleans Police Department Operations Manual, available at https://www.nola.gov/getattachment/NOPD/Policies/Bias-Free.pdf/.

72 New Orleans Police Department Community Engagement Manual, available at https://www.nola.gov/getattachment/NOPD/NOPD-Consent-Decree/Community-Engagement-Manual-(3).pdf.

73 New Orleans Independent Police Monitor, available at http://nolaipm.gov/history/.

74 A Newsletter of the Police Executive Research Forum, Police Executive Research Forum (July–Sept. 2016), https://www.policeforum.org/assets/docs/Subject_to_Debate/Debate2016/debate_2016_julsep.pdf.

75 The Department of Justice’s Interactive Guide to the Civil Rights Division’s Police Reforms, supra note 44.

76 Skyler Swisher, Miami-Dade Police Department bans chokeholds, Sun Sentinel (June 11, 2020), https://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/miami-dade/fl-ne-miami-dade-neck-restraints-banned-20200611-xzpcv5m2j5dhndnl5t2onmhd7e-story.html.

77 Body Worn Camera Program, Miami Police (2013), https://www.miami-police.org/virtual_policing_unit.html.

78 De-escalation In High Risk Tactics, Miami Dade College, https://www.mdc.edu/justice/training-programs/training-de-escalation-high-risk-tactics.aspx.

79 Candice Wang, Can implicit bias training help cops overcome racism? Popular Science (June 16, 2020), https://www.popsci.com/story/science/implicit-bias-training-police-racism-black-lives-matter/.

80 Community Policing, Crime Prevention, and Juvenile Programs Evaluation by Miami-Dade Police Department, available at https://www.miamidade.gov/police/library/community-policing.pdf.

81 Civilian Investigative Panel (CIP), Miami, https://www.miamigov.com/Government/Departments-Organizations/Civilian-Investigative-Panel-CIP.

82 Miami-Dade Police Department releases letter to community amid protests, local10.com (June 8, 2020), https://www.local10.com/news/local/2020/06/08/miami-dade-police-department-releases-letter-to-community-amid-protests/.

83 Atlanta passes ban on police chokeholds, empowers citizen review board, News Break (June 6, 2020), https://www.newsbreak.com/georgia/atlanta/news/0PWvAnaK/atlanta-passes-ban-on-police-chokeholds-empowers-citizen-review-board.

84 Atlanta Police Department Policy Manual, available at https://www.atlantapd.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=3243.

85 Atlanta Police Training Academy, available at https://citycouncil.atlantaga.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=340.

86 Id.

87 Reginald Moorman, Community Policing Programs, Atlanta Police Department, https://www.atlantapd.org/services/community-services/community-policing-programs.

88 Atlanta Citizen Review Board, available at https://acrbgov.org/.

89 Atlanta Police Training Academy, supra note 118.

90 Monika Evstatieva & Tim Mak, supra note 57.

91 Equipment and Supplies Policy, available at http://www2.minneapolismn.gov/police/policy/mpdpolicy_4-200_4-200.

92 Minneapolis Recruitment and Training, available at http://www2.minneapolismn.gov/police/policy/mpdpolicy_2-500_2-500.

93 Riham Feshir, Minneapolis budgets $300,000 for police bias training, MPR News (Dec. 10, 2015), https://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/12/10/mpls-police-bias-training.

94 Minneapolis Community-Oriented Policing and Community Relations Training, available at http://www2.minneapolismn.gov/police/policy/mpdpolicy_6-300_6-300.

95 Minneapolis: Civilian Review, Human Rights Watch, https://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports98/police/uspo87.htm.

96 Duty To Intervene: Floyd Cops Spoke Up But Didn’t Step In, CBS Minnesota (June 7, 2020), https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2020/06/07/duty-to-intervene-floyd-cops-spoke-up-but-didnt-step-in/.

97 Governor Cuomo Signs Legislation Requiring New York State Police Officers to Wear Body Cameras and Creating the Law Enforcement Misconduct Investigative Office, Yonkers Tribune (June 16, 2020), https://www.yonkerstribune.com/2020/06/governor-cuomo-signs-legislation-requiring-new-york-state-police-officers-to-wear-body-cameras-and-creating-the-law-enforcement-misconduct-investigative-office.

98 Repeal 50a and Body Cameras for the YPD, Yonkers Times (June 13, 2020), http://yonkerstimes.com/council-majority-leader-pineda-isaac-repeal-50a-and-body-cameras-for-the-ypd/.

99 Yonkers Police Department Public Opinion Survey 2017, available at https://www.yonkersny.gov/home/showdocument?id=16846.

100 Oklahoma Police Department policies, available at https://www.okc.gov/home/showdocument?id=17431.

101 Body-Worn Cameras, OKC.gov, https://www.okc.gov/government/social-justice/justice-and-the-law/body-worn-camera-pilot-program.

102 Police Chief Wade Gourley, OKC.gov, https://www.okc.gov/departments/police/about-us/meet-the-chief-of-police.

103 Matt Dinger, Oklahoma City officers take long look at themselves and citizens in bias training class, The Oklahoman (Dec. 27, 2016), https://oklahoman.com/article/5531923/oklahoma-city-officers-take-long-look-at-themselves-and-citizens-i n-bias-training-class.

104 Community Programs, OKC.gov, https://www.okc.gov/departments/police/community-programs.

105 OKCPD Citizens Advisory Board, OKC.gov, https://www.okc.gov/departments/police/about-us/citizens-advisory-board.

106 Oklahoma City Police respond to nationwide “8 Can’t Wait” campaign, Oklahoma’s News 4 (June 15, 2020), https://kfor.com/news/oklahoma-city-police-respond-to-nationwide-8-cant-wait-campaign/.

107 Ashley Luther, What you need to know about Milwaukee police body cameras, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (May 23, 2018), https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/crime/2018/05/23/what-you-need-know-milwaukee-police-body-cameras/635072002/.

108 Recommendations, City of Milwaukee, https://city.milwaukee.gov/fpc/Collaborative-Reform-Process/Chapter-5-Use-of-Force-and-Deadly-Force-Practices/Recommendation-15.1.htm.

109 Candice Wang, supra note 112.

110 Office of Community Outreach & Education, Milwaukee Police Department, https://city.milwaukee.gov/police/MPD-Divisions/Community-Outreach-Education.htm.

111 Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission, available at https://city.milwaukee.gov/fpc/About.

112 Amanda St. Hilaire, What Milwaukee police policies really say (and why it matters), Fox 6 Now (June 22, 2020), https://fox6now.com/2020/06/22/what-milwaukee-police-policies-really-say-and-why-it-matters/.

113 NYC Young Men’s Initiative: Program Summary—NYC Cure Violence, City of New York, 2012 http://www.nyc.gov/html/ymi/downloads/pdf/cure_violence.pdf.

114 Sheyla Delgado, Laila Alsabahi, Kevin Wolff, Nicole Alexander, Patricia Coba, and Jeffrey Butts, The Effects of Cure Violence in the South Bronx and East New York, Brooklyn, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, October 2, 2017 https://johnjayrec.nyc/2017/10/02/cvinsobronxeastny/.

115 Id.

116 Id.

117 Id.

118 Id.

119 Id.

120 Id.

121 Id.

122 Peacemaking Program, Center for Court Innovation, https://www.courtinnovation.org/programs/peacemaking-program/more-info.

123 Michael Maly, Keeping the Peace: A Study of Restorative Justice Peace Circles in Two Chicago Public Schools, Restorative School Toolkit, Spring 2014, http://restorativeschoolstoolkit.org/sites/default/files/Keeping%20the%20Peace_Final%20Report%20Spring14_Final.pdf.

124 Suvi Hynynen Lambson, Peacemaking Circles: Evaluating a Native American Restorative Justice Practice in a State Criminal Court Setting in Brooklyn, Center for Court Innovation, January 2015 https://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/documents/Peacemaking%20Circles%20Final.pdf.

125 Id.

126 Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets: Media Guide 2020, White Bird Clinic, 2020 https://whitebirdclinic.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/CAHOOTS-Media-Guide-20200626.pdf.

127 Id.

128 Id.

129 Id.

130 Id.

131 Kaia Sand, TAKE ACTION! Petition City Council to Increase Funding for Portland Street Response, Portland Street Response, June 7, 2020 https://portlandstreetresponse.org/.

132 Work: Community-Based Crisis Response, Denver Alliance for Street Health Response, http://dashrco.org/#:~:text=Since%202018%2C%20Denver%20Alliance%20for,safety%20and%20serve%20our%20communities.

133 Devone L. Boggan, To Stop Crime, Hand Over Cash, New York Times, July 4, 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/05/opinion/sunday/to-stop-crime-hand-over-cash.html.

134 Id.

135 Id.

136 A.M. Wolf, A. Del Prado Lippman, C. Glesmann, E. Castro, Process Evaluation for the Office of Neighborhood Safety, National Council on Crime and Delinquency, July 2015, https://www.advancepeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/4%E2%80%94ONS-Process-Evaluation_FINAL.July_.2015.pdf.

137 Id.

138 Cynthia G. Lee, Fred L. Cheesman, David B. Rottman, Rachel Swaner, Suvi Lambson, Mike Rempel, and Rick Curtis, A Community Court Grows in Brooklyn: A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Red Hook Community Justice Center, National Center for State Courts, November 2013, https://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/documents/RH%20Evaluation%20Final%20Report.pdf.

139 Id.

140 Id.

141 Cynthia G. Lee, Fred L. Cheesman, David B. Rottman, Rachel Swaner, Suvi Lambson, Mike Rempel, and Rick Curtis, Executive Summary: A Community Court Grows in Brooklyn: A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Red Hook Community Justice Center, National Center for State Courts, November 2013, https://www.ncsc.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/19113/11012013-red-hook-exeuctive-summary.pdf.

142 Id.

143 Id.

144 Id.

145 Jeffrey Butts, Janeen Buck, Mark Coggeshall, The Impact of Teen Court on Young Offenders, National Criminal Justice Reference Service, April 2002, https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/237391.pdf.