Federal Court Approves Reforms Targeting The Chicago Police Department

from the but-there's-no-federal-backup-to-come-to-the-rescue dept

It's not much but it's a start. Chicago's police force has spent several years vying for the title of "Worst PD in America." Between its routine deployment of excessive force to its off-the-books "black site" where arrestees are separated from their humanity and their Constitutional rights, the Chicago PD has been a horrific mess for several years.

A federal judge has approved a consent decree that would enact reforms aimed at repairing the trust the PD has damaged for decades.

In a 16-page motion, U.S. District Judge Robert Dow stated that while it’s not perfect, the historic decree is “an important first step toward needed reforms of the Chicago Police Department and its policies.”

“As noted above, the Court is under no illusion that this will be an easy process,” Dow wrote. “It took a long time to get to this place, and it may take a long time to get out of it. With that said, there are good reasons to think that the conditions and incentives may be in place to start making progress right away.

The consent decree contains a long list of reforms that cover everything from enhanced use of de-escalation techniques to breaking the PD's unofficial "code of silence." The numerous changes will be overseen by a federal monitor to ensure they're being followed.

The consent decree was met with the expected resistance from the Chicago PD and its union. A bit more unexpectedly, the consent decree was met with very vocal opposition from the federal government. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions repeatedly claimed the decree would result in more dead bodies piling up in Chicago, pointing to a single study with questionable findings of increased violent crime following the imposition of consent decrees. Sessions termed this violent crime increase the "ACLU effect," attempting to portray greater respect for communities and their residents' Constitutional rights as the flash point of upticks in criminal activity.

The City of Chicago disagreed with Sessions and stated it was uninterested in rolling back the proposed changes. It pointed out the DOJ agreed with the proposed consent decree all the way up until Sessions took office and didn't see any reason to back out of it just because the new AG was more enthralled with locking people up than respecting their rights.

Opponents of the consent decree claim the city can't afford to have better cops. In his order [PDF], Judge Dow says this is nonsense.

Other commenters have focused on the financial burden of the decree going forward, as evidenced by the $2.85 million maximum annual budget for the monitoring team. This is a large expenditure of public money by any measure. Yet is is a tiny fraction of what the City has spent paying out judgments and settlements, not to mention lawyers (both outside and inside counsel), for civil rights litigation over the past few decades. See [158] at 9. Indeed, had a monitoring team been billing the City at the rate of $2.85 million per year since 1790, when Jean Baptiste Point du Sable first set up camp at the mouth of the Chicago River, the total bill of $652.65 million would not equal the City’s litigation-related payouts in civil rights actions since 2004.

Will these changes be sustained and result in better policing in Chicago? That's tough to say. The people it affects most (police officers) want it the least and, historically, PD brass has been slow to roll out changes and extremely reluctant to hold officers accountable for violating internal policies, much less federally-ordered consent decrees. This time around, the city will have zero support from the DOJ, which, as a matter of policy under this administration, will not act as an enforcer for federal consent decrees or open investigations of law enforcement agencies found to be perpetually violating the rights of the people they're supposed to be protecting.

Filed Under: chicago, chicago pd, chicago police, civil rights, consent decree, doj, jeff sessions, robert down


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 4 Feb 2019 @ 4:06pm

    What will the DoJ do in their spare time?

    "This time around, the city will have zero support from the DOJ, which, as a matter of policy under this administration, will not act as an enforcer for federal consent decrees or open investigations of law enforcement agencies found to be perpetually violating the rights of the people they're supposed to be protecting."

    It certainly appears that as a matter of policy the US DoJ is refusing to enforce Federal law. By that reasoning, what is there left for the DoJ to do? Right, help the FBI create terrorist incidents and counter espionage. How many employees do they have? Seems like they have too little work to do.

    It also leaves one to wonder if the DoJ isn't going to enforce Federal Law, who will?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 4 Feb 2019 @ 4:42pm

      Re: What will the DoJ do in their spare time?

      It still enforces it. It just does so selectively. Everyone has violated some law or another after all. In the right hands, it becomes a tool for oppression and terror. Justice is subjective after all. We have done away with innocent until proven guilty and gone for guilty since they were targeted.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Mononymous Tim (profile), 4 Feb 2019 @ 5:08pm

    Excellent

    Next, put Meigs Field back!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Feb 2019 @ 5:17pm

    The Blue Line Gang think they are above the law. They're all guilty, murdering tyrants as they all cover for each other. It's been the UNIONS fault the worst, helping to protect them.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 4 Feb 2019 @ 6:51pm

      Re:

      Exactly. Unions for workers who are paid by tax dollars should be illegal. Their existence is justified by increasing the pay and rights for their people and decreasing it for everyone else. In most jurisdictions the exact same violent act against someone could be zero jail time through multiple years first time offense, depending on if they were an officer or the arrestee in a given scenario. The amount of evidence needed to overwhelm the thin blue line is insane.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Coyne Tibbets (profile), 4 Feb 2019 @ 6:10pm

    This time for sure!

    Oh, goody, another consent decree for the police to ignore.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 4 Feb 2019 @ 8:28pm

    So long as 'please stop doing that' is all that happens...

    Forget 'consent degrees', start levying hefty fines against individual cops for what they do, if not throwing them in jail for their actions, and then and only then will they start giving a damn about those pesky 'laws' and 'rules' that people keep getting on their case for violating.

    Until they face actual penalties for their actions they have no reason to care one bit about one more 'pretty please' wrapped up in the guise of a 'consent degree'.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2019 @ 1:35am

      Re: So long as 'please stop doing that' is all that happens...

      what we really need is some sort of organization that will catch members of the PD violating the law and decree, and take them to a relative neutral/objective body to evaluate the evidence and had met out approprate punishment (designed to act as a deterrent to such behavior in the future).

      ...wait.... I think that sounds familiar....

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ninja (profile), 6 Feb 2019 @ 5:12am

      Re: So long as 'please stop doing that' is all that happens...

      It has to be an entity managed by a different branch of the government. I'd say a legislative body. Because the executive won't always be sympathetic to doing the right thing so you need another body to do it.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Bergman (profile), 5 Feb 2019 @ 3:59am

    What's the difference between black sites and kidnap for ransom?

    You can legally shoot a kidnapper and escape to freedom.

    But if you escaped from a Chicago PD black site, even if you were being illegally held and legally it was kidnapping, escaping from a jail is a crime in this country.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 5 Feb 2019 @ 6:09am

    LawDirt

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown for basic formatting. (HTML is not supported.)
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown for basic formatting. (HTML is not supported.)
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.