Policing Project files amicus brief in Barnes v. Felix in the Supreme Court

NEW YORK — On November 20, 2024, the Policing Project filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court of the United States case Barnes v. Felix. The amicus brief urges the Court to reject the Fifth Circuit’s “moment of the threat” doctrine and instead use a “totality of the circumstances” approach to evaluate claims of excessive force under the Fourth Amendment. 

The brief, filed on behalf of 22 current and former law enforcement officials, explains that an officer’s conduct and decisions prior to their use of force should be considered as part of a fuller “totality of the circumstances” approach, rather than a narrow consideration of the threat at the moment force was used. That fuller approach, the amici argue, would allow for consideration of possible escalatory measures an officer took prior to using force, but also possible de-escalatory measures, like warnings and tactical re-positioning. As the amicus brief explains, those de-escalatory measures are essential to public trust in law enforcement, as is legal accountability for officers who engage in dangerous, escalatory conduct.

Barnes arose after 24-year old Ashtian Barnes was killed by a Harris County law enforcement officer during a traffic stop in 2016.

Read the full brief here.

Policing Project congratulates Atlanta Police Alternatives and Diversion (PAD) Initiative on renewed contract

The Policing Project congratulates the Atlanta Police Alternatives and Diversion (PAD) Initiative, a leading non-police alternative response program, on its renewed contract through 2026. As we explained in our joint letter of support with the Center for Innovations in Community Safety at Georgetown Law and other research and advocacy organizations, Atlanta PAD has developed an impressive track record of success serving Atlanta residents with critical services in place of unnecessary arrest, while also serving as a national model of what successful alternative response programs can look like. We celebrate this recognition of the program's success and urge other cities to follow its lead.

NYU Policing Project releases new public guidance on police consent decree monitors

The Policing Project at NYU School of Law has published a new report and toolkit on consent decree monitorships as a resource for monitors, communities, and law enforcement agencies.

Washington, D.C. – Today, the Policing Project at NYU School of Law, with funding from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, has announced the release of Monitoring Law Enforcement Consent Decrees: An Introduction And Starter Toolkit, a new report providing public guidance on the monitoring of police consent decrees.

The report provides a detailed overview of what court-appointed monitors do and how they do their work, as well as a “starter kit” of specific tools that monitors can use throughout the consent decree implementation process. Drawing from successful practices and lessons learned from prior monitorships, it introduces a set of practical tools — including examples, templates, and practical resources — to help monitors effectively conduct an independent evaluation of law enforcement performance, a vital component of ensuring that decrees produce safer, more effective, and lawful policing.

The toolkit is also a resource for police departments, governments, and communities across the country that are making changes because of a settlement agreement or consent decree – including those involving a state enforcement arm or private entity.

"Consent decree monitors play a key role in ensuring that police departments are held accountable to, and able to meet, standards required by the Constitution and federal law," said Matthew Barge, Senior Policing Fellow at the Policing Project and NYU School of Law and the report’s lead author. "Today's report will empower current and future monitors, as well as police departments, local governments, and impacted communities, with a strong understanding of what a monitor can and does do, as well as a set of tools to help ensure that critical reforms are faithfully and effectively implemented by law enforcement agencies."

A monitor serves as a representative of a court and an independent validator of a jurisdiction’s compliance with a court-approved consent decree following a “pattern or practice” investigation by the United States Department of Justice. The scope of these investigations and subsequent consent decrees is varied, but often includes steps to remedy law enforcement practices found to violate the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment; the Americans with Disabilities Act; and other federal laws.

As the report explains, the role of a monitor is also varied – the appointed individual will assess an agency’s compliance with a consent decree’s requirements on behalf of the court, but will also serve as a technical advisor providing real-time, substantive feedback to the law enforcement agency subject to the decree and will facilitate the consent decree implementation process.

The document provides in-depth guidance not only to individuals who may be interested in or new to consent decree monitoring, but also to jurisdictions who have or may enter into consent decrees and the law enforcement agencies that are or may be subject to decrees.

Read the full report at https://policingproject.org/s/Monitoring-Law-Enforcement-Consent-Decrees.pdf.

###

The Policing Project at NYU School of Law promotes public safety through transparency, equity, and democratic engagement. Learn about the Policing Project at www.policingproject.org.

Policing Project announces new statute and webinar on removing obstacles to police accountability

The Policing Project at NYU School of Law has released a new model statute and upcoming webinar to build accountability for law enforcement and improve public safety through state and local legislation.

The statute –  An Act to Remove Barriers to Accountability and Facilitate Robust Oversight  –  is designed to remove certain barriers to accountability that provide law enforcement with special protections against investigation and discipline. Those protections, which far exceed those enjoyed by other civil servants and hamper legitimate internal misconduct investigations, are often written into state law as part of a Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights (LEOBOR) or included as individual provisions in a police collective bargaining agreement (CBA).

These barriers to accountability are a widespread problem: more than twenty states have some form of LEOBOR on the books and a review of 178 law enforcement CBAs found that 88 percent contained at least one provision that could meaningfully hinder discipline. Each day, however, more cities and states are taking steps to remove these provisions and improve accountability and public safety.

For more information on the statute, read our section-by-section summary, our explainer, our FAQ document, and a checklist to see what these provisions look like when codified.
 

__

Join us for a webinar on September 24 at 3:00 pm ET – featuring Reneé Hall, former Dallas Police Chief; Victor Dempsey, community organizer at the Legal Defense Fund; and Stephen Rushin, Professor of Law at Loyola University Chicago School of Law –  on our model statute and how state and local legislation can remove these dangerous and unfair barriers to accountability and public safety.

This program has been approved for one New York State CLE credit in the category of Areas of Professional Practice. The credit is both transitional and non-transitional; it is appropriate for both experienced and newly admitted attorneys.

Register here.