By Lara Trautman

Long a bit player in the growing movement to reimagine the criminal justice system, prosecutors are finally entering the spotlight. Leveraging the tremendous authority of the office, they have begun to reshape the flow of criminal cases and nudge outcomes in a more productive direction. These early successes, however, should not obscure a broader truth: they cannot do it alone. Prosecutorial efforts can only realize their lofty potential for positive change with the active and enduring support of state legislatures. With unparalleled power over everything from charging decisions to plea bargaining, it may seem as though prosecutors could bend the justice system to their will without any assistance. Yet, the reality is much more complicated. For example, expansive charging and pretrial decision-making is relatively ineffective without the provision of strong alternatives to traditional prosecutorial pathways. Likewise, low funding can stymie individualized consideration of cases while poor data collection can get in the way of evidence-based policy. And here is where the legislature can and must step in. Only they have the power to remove many of these external roadblocks to constructive and beneficial prosecutorial action. Rewriting the law and adjusting appropriations can ensure that prosecutors have the tools, authority and discretion necessary to transform prosecution. Accordingly, this brief is offered as a guide for those legislators who wish to become allies in the prosecutor-driven reform movement by proposing specific actions legislatures can take to support prosecutors who are attempting to improve the criminal justice system in their jurisdictions

R STREET SHORTS NO. 88 April 2020

Washington, DC: R Street, 2020. 5p.

By Nila Bala and Emily Mooney

Seventeen-year-old William Miller was simply trying to go to a morning dentist appointment, when two adults—a school resource officer and school discipline assistant—blocked off the exit and threatened him with suspension if his car proceeded further. William explained that his absence was excused and that he could provide a note supporting the legitimacy of the excuse upon his return. But the officer and assistant continued to block the exit and tell him that, unless he got a parent on the line, he would be considered truant if he left. At one point, body cam footage shows the teenager attempting to pull his car around the deputy’s golf cart, only for the police officer to say, “You’re going to get shot if you come another fucking foot close to me. You run into me, you’ll get fucking shot.” William does not proceed further, but the arguments between the 17-year-old and two adults continue for several minutes. Seemingly unbeknownst to them, William’s mother had already called the school earlier to inform them of his absence and grant her permission. Nevertheless, River Ridge High School later suspended William for multiple weeks and then expelled him due to the incident. The adults involved faced no admonishments or repercussions for their behavior. Incidents like these should cause all people to question the role and priorities of police who interact with children in school settings. After all, children are different from adults, and William’s behavior, although perhaps immature, is far from unexpected. Developmental research (and any parent’s anecdotal accounts) suggest youth, especially teenagers, are often highly-impulsive and risk-loving. Given these facts, responses to their misbehavior—William’s attempt to go around the golf cart in this instance—should be crafted with care and informed by youth development principles. However, accounts like this, along with others in Miami and Chicago, demonstrate that this is not always how police youth interactions are handled. And, even the most well-intentioned police officers may cause more harm than good by unnecessarily introducing youth to the justice system, interacting with youth in a manner that leads to a negative impression or by exacerbating racial and ethnic disparities in the system. Accordingly, this policy study seeks to provide an overview of the current state of policing within school settings. It will then focus on identifying conservative priorities for police to uphold in this context, acknowledging that schools and communities often ask police to do more than they are best equipped for or should do. And it will offer potential policy considerations for positive change.

R STREET POLICY STUDY NO. 196 March 2020

Washington, DC: R Street, 2020. 8p.

By Lars Trautman

As defined by convictions, sentence lengths, and the relentless enforcement of the law, for decades, conservatives have prized “toughness” above all other attributes in assessing a prosecutor’s worth. Indeed, until recently, this same mindset permeated conservatives’ approach to nearly every other aspect of the criminal justice system. But then something interesting happened. Starting in Texas and quickly spreading to other “red” states and beyond, conservatives began to realize that mentality actually undermined the very goals they were pursuing. From public safety to fiscal probity, individual liberty to human dignity, a “smart on crime” approach that addressed underlying causes of crime proved better able to deliver than the old status quo that all too often relied on incarceration as the antidote to societal ills. Reform has followed in nearly every state2 and even managed to pass a notoriously divided Congress. The legislative focus of these conservative efforts to date, however, belies the intrinsically local nature of criminal justice. The fates of the overwhelming majority of individuals who come into contact with the criminal justice system are determined by a collection of county, town and city officials. Perhaps foremost among these is the local district attorney. After all, while a judge may act as the king in his court, only the district attorney has the ability to influence criminal proceedings in every single courtroom across her jurisdiction. The district attorney’s office is thus a natural channel for new criminal justice ideas. This realization has helped to propel a growing movement on the political left to elect “progressive prosecutors” who wield the broad powers of the office to further liberal criminal justice goals relating to decarceration and racial justice, among others.5 Plaudits have come from all corners for many of these efforts6 and the result is a coherent narrative around what it means to be a liberal-minded prosecutor in the twenty-first century. Of course, plenty of reasonable and just prosecutors have no aspirations to ever wear the “progressive” label, nor would their constituents want them to. This raises two related questions for prosecutors who reject this progressive mold, yet nevertheless yearn to be smarter and more even-handed than their predecessors: can the disruption of traditional prosecutorial practices align with a more conservative worldview and what does the center-right path toward more fair and effective prosecution look like? The answer is that a conservative prosecutor can and should challenge current prosecutorial practices by striving to become a more productive prosecutor in the broader sense of the term. This means ensuring that every prosecutorial decision is productive insofar as it produces an outcome that actually improves community wellbeing. It requires a subtle understanding that a charge, conviction or sentence is not itself the outcome, merely a factor building toward one that includes a safer community and rehabilitated defendant. Ultimately, trading a penchant for tough prosecutors for those who are productive in this manner will allow conservatives to forge a more constructive prosecutorial identity that does a better job of efficiently pursuing justice and keeping their communities secure and whole

R STREET POLICY STUDY NO. 193 January 2020

Washington, DC: R Street, 2020. 6p.

By Lars Trautman

In many ways, the criminal justice system is the epitome of government control; it is also a system marked by high costs and poor outcomes, especially for juveniles. Seeking to build a more effective system, Florida established its civil citation and similar diversion programs to provide an alternative path for juveniles accused of committing low-level offenses. These programs empowered civil society and community members to contribute at all levels, including as program operators, treatment and service providers, and as a source of volunteers for government managed programs. The results of this public-private partnership have been largely positive, including boasting the lowest recidivism rate of all of the programs under the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice’s purview, which suggests the value of empowering civil society to help address criminal justice issues.

Washington, DC: R Street, 2019. 22p;

By SteVon Felton

The 1991 beating of Rodney King and the subsequent acquittal of the Los Angeles police officers responsible for the attack sparked massive riots and protests across the nation. Following an investigation by the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Civil Rights Division, Congress granted the attorney general the power to investigate “a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers that violates Constitutional or federal rights.” In cases of a proven pattern or practice of police misconduct, the court may use a federal, court-enforced order, known as a consent decree, as a mechanism to force police departments to address institutional failures. Under such orders, a law enforcement agency and the Justice Department, overseen by an independent monitor, negotiate and establish concrete benchmarks to determine which reforms will constitute the successful end of the decree. Since the first consent decree in 1994, the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department has conducted over 65 investigations and entered into 40 reform agreements with police departments across the country. According to the Division, these negotiations are most effective when they can “ensure accountability, transparency and the flexibility to accomplish complex institutional reforms.” Indeed, a number of studies have now confirmed that consent decrees helped resolve management and oversight issues in cities such as Pittsburgh, Los Angeles and Cincinnati.4 However, while federal consent decrees have their place in promoting systemic policy change, they consistently fail to effect local and cultural change within departments. Several factors contribute to this phenomenon. For starters, as is often the case, centralized models like federal consent decrees cannot adequately adjust to localized systems of knowledge and regional distinctions between departments. Because they target local governments rather than individuals, the reform agreements reached by the DOJ and local law enforcement agencies often fail to sustain cultural change.5 Moreover, within some police departments, consent decrees lack the very thing that is perhaps most important to their success—the support of officers. Without buy-in from individual officers, police departments often disregard best practices that they view as externally forced upon them. And because policing is a profession that allows substantial discretion, in some departments officers openly ignore state and federal policies.6 Given the localized nature of police-citizen interactions, a top-down approach to police reform is virtually guaranteed to be unsuccessful. In light of these failures, the New Orleans Police Department’s Ethical Policing is Courageous (EPIC) program provides an alternative structure that begins with officers’ localized knowledge level and ends with systemic change. By allowing officers to police themselves, EPIC utilizes them and their experiences as resources to promote meaningful change

R STREET SHORTS NO. 70 April 2019

Washington, DC: R Street, 2019. 5p.

By Sophia Hunt, Claudia Nmai, and Matthew Clair

This report summarizes perceptions of policing among a racially and socio-economically diverse sample of 37 people who faced criminal charges in the Hall of Justice, a courthouse in San Jose, California, between August 2021 and March 2022. A majority of criminal defendants we interviewed reported negative perceptions of personal police treatment, but a considerable minority reported positive perceptions. Among those who reported negative perceptions, two criticisms were common: (1) individual police officers’ violence, abuse, and fabrication of evidence; and (2) systemic policing practices that are overly intrusive and estrange certain disfavored groups in the Bay Area, such as the unhoused. Among those who reported positive perceptions, some believe that, despite their personal experiences of positive treatment, police do not treat everyone fairly and policing quality varies by context and the race of the policed person. Alongside these perceptions, a handful of defendants in the sample offered visions for changing policing. Two notable visions were: (1) reallocating resources from police departments toward other city services or under-resourced groups; and (2) reforming police departments in ways that reduce discrimination and abuse. While we discuss variation along demographic characteristics in our sample, we foreground how the range of experiences and visions of policing in San Jose have implications for policymakers and future research.

Court Listening Project, Report no. 1. Court Listening Project ((c/o Matthew Clair, Stanford University) 2022, 15p.

By John Bansemer, Greg Rattray and Franklin Lee

The R Street Institute has conducted a study of the challenges associated with improving state and municipal responses to cyber attacks. This study leverages existing reports, interviews with defenders at the state and municipal level, experts studying these challenges, as well as workshops conducted in conjunction with the New York Cyber Task Force. It describes the shape of the challenges and offers recommendations for action to improve state and municipal cyber response capabilities. Further, understanding the associated challenges and extending the work on the recommendations within this report requires significant follow-on efforts. This report seeks to engage and assist those on the front line—governors, mayors, personnel, and state and local governmental organizations. While the federal government and the private sector play key roles, they were not the specific focus of this study

R STREET POLICY STUDY NO. 229 May 2021, 13p.

By Lars Trautman and Camille Infantolino

As with so many facets of American life, the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic hit the criminal justice system like a tsunami, upending existing practices and forcing leaders to rapidly consider new approaches. The fast-spreading, deadly contagion added new urgency to long-festering issues, especially the problems associated with the sheer number of individuals contained within and processed through the system. To protect those working within jails and prisons or those facing the prospect of becoming confined, jurisdictions adopted new policies to reduce the number of individuals entering the system altogether, or at least its correctional facilities. One of the primary ways in which jurisdictions grappled with that priority was by instituting new alternatives to arrest. Across the country, jurisdictions expanded citations in lieu of arrest, deprioritized police stops for minor transgressions, and changed how they received and responded to certain civilian complaints. In each of these instances, the policy shifts suited the COVID-19 situation especially well because of their propensity to reduce unnecessary human contact, particularly in close quarters. Of course, whether jurisdictions retain and even expand these measures, or whether additional jurisdictions follow suit, will depend on more than simply their immediate health benefits. In addition to considering how well the policies lived up to their promises of saving resources, avoiding unproductive police encounters and reducing government interference in individuals’ lives, local authorities will have to weigh the political and public reaction to their introduction. Indeed, one obstacle to alternatives to arrest that has existed since long before the pandemic is fear about how the public will respond to their adoption. Accordingly, the present brief addresses some of these concerns by delving into COVID-19- inspired shifts in alternatives-to-arrest policy and examines how these changes were received in the popular press.

R STREET SHORTS NO. 98 December 2020, 4p.

By Matthew B. Ross

 1. Introduction In November 2021, the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office of Public Integrity and Accountability (NJOPIA) engaged the author of this study for the purpose of conducting an independent analysis of traffic stops made by the New Jersey State Police (NJ-SP). Based on the author’s extensive experience working with state and local policymakers to develop early warning systems for identifying police disparities, the NJ OPIA requested that the analysis focus on the central question of whether there was disparate treatment on the part of NJ-SP towards racial and ethnic minorities.2 After cleaning and linking all of the raw data provided by the New Jersey Office of Law Enforcement Professional Standards (NJ-OLEPS), the analytical sample used in this analysis consisted of 6,177,109 traffic stops made by NJ-SP from 2009 to 2021. In the full analytical sample, 60.52 percent of traffic stops were made of White non-Hispanic motorists while 18.8 percent were Black/African-American and 13.44 percent were Hispanic/Latinx. The overall volume of minority motorists stopped by NJ-SP increased from 35.34 percent in 2009 to 46.28 percent in 2021. The overarching finding from the analysis of the NJ-SP data from 2009-21 is that there was extremely strong evidence of a large and persistent disparity both is the decision to stop as well as the decision to engage in post-stop enforcement like search, vehicular exits, use of force, and arrest. In general, the results were estimated with a very high degree of statistical confidence, survived multiple robustness tests, and were found across most years and troops/stations. In the opinion of this study’s author, these disparities represent strong empirical evidence that NJ-SP is engaged in enforcement practices that result in adverse treatment towards minority motorists. Following best practices, this study applies an ensemble of the most reliable statistical tests available in the scientific literature. The intuition of this approach is that the shortcomings of any individual test are overcome by the totality of the evidence produced by a multitude of tests examining a broad set of enforcement outcomes.

Boston: Northeastern University, 2023. 44p.

By Madison, Wisconsin Police Department

  In August 2023, Madison City Council passed a resolution authorizing the Implementation of the Body-Worn Camera Experiment Program. The resolution included multiple attachments that provide a history of the body worn cameras (BWC), feasibility reports, example policy, public comments, Alder amendments, legal review, and Chief Barnes’ memo requesting approval to conduct the experiment. The resolution represents a culmination of several years of effort by city residents, staff and alders. The experiment program consisted of technology, research and cost estimates. The technology portion began April 1, 2024, and was completed July 14. The BWC units were worn by officers in the North District. The first two weeks consisted of setting up and assigning units to officers, testing, and training. The use of body worn cameras began in the field on April 15. The BWC units were loaned by MPD’s existing dash camera vendor for the duration of experiment. The research was conducted by an outside researcher; Dr. Broderick Turner at Virginia Tech. Police Director Eleazer Hunt and members of the BWC Committee met with Dr. Turner multiple times to identify needed data and survey questions. This report includes Dr. Turner’s findings (Appendix A) and a budget estimate for implementation (Appendix B). Estimates are based on full deployment of BWC across MPD, the acquisition of hardware, operations/storage needs, peripherals, personnel, and support several years of operation. During the experiment, an interim Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) guided the use of BWC (Appendix C). This SOP is informed by the Police Body-Worn Camera Feasibility Review Committee, MPD’s current SOP for dash cameras and audio microphones , and a review of model policies developed by the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the U.S. Department of Justice. Findings from the experiment: 1- Officers did not change behavior while wearing a BWC 2- Charges were not added when officers reviewed video 3- Technical issues related to battery life and uploading video were evident in the first half of the experiment and resolved 4- Specific situational use of BWC required clarification of the SOP 5- The limitations of the experiment included a short duration, a small number of officers participated, there was limited time for analysis (interviews), and no post-experiment analysis 6- BWC may help with trust building, legitimacy, and transparency  7- Public Records requests impacted staff time to research, redact, and provide videos to requestors  

Madison, WI: City Police Department, 2024. 47p.

By United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division and United States Attorney’s Office District of Massachusetts

The Department of Justice (DOJ) opened an investigation of the Worcester Police Department (WPD) and the City of Worcester (City) on November 15, 2022. Based on this investigation, DOJ has reasonable cause to believe that WPD and the City engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives people of their rights under the Constitution and federal law. First, WPD uses excessive force. Second, WPD engages in outrageous government conduct by permitting undercover officers to participate in sexual contact with women suspected of being involved in the commercial sex trade. FINDINGS The Department of Justice has reasonable cause to believe that the Worcester Police Department and the City of Worcester engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives people of their rights under the Constitution and federal law: • WPD uses excessive force that violates the Fourth Amendment. Officers unreasonably deploy Tasers, use police dogs, and strike people in the head. Officers rapidly escalate minor incidents by using more force than necessary, including during encounters with people who have behavioral health disabilities or are in crisis. • WPD engages in outrageous government conduct that violates the constitutional rights of women suspected of being involved in the commercial sex trade by engaging in sexual contact during undercover operations. This violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause. WPD’s inadequate policies, training, supervision, investigations, and discipline fostered these unlawful patterns or practices. This investigation also raises serious concerns that WPD officers have sexually assaulted women under threat of arrest and engaged in other problematic sexual conduct. WPD lacks the policies and practices needed to adequately address reports of sexual assault by non-officers as well, raising concerns about gender discrimination. In addition, the investigation raises serious concerns that WPD’s enforcement practices may result in discriminatory policing against Hispanic and Black people, whom WPD disproportionately warns, cites, arrests, and subjects to force. DOJ does not find at this time that these racial disparities amount to an unlawful pattern or practice of racial discrimination. However, WPD should collect and assess data about its practices and take steps to ensure they do not have an unlawful discriminatory effect. Worcester’s law enforcement professionals work hard to keep the public safe, often under difficult conditions. We commend those who dedicate their professional lives to serving the community. We also commend WPD and the City for implementing some reforms while this investigation was pending, including adopting body-worn cameras and creating a Policy Review Committee that solicits public comment on WPD policies. However, remedying the problems identified through this investigation will require more. DOJ expects to work constructively with WPD and the City to implement the reforms necessary to address the unlawful conduct outlined in this report.

Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, 2024. 43p.

By Jess Keller

The Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security released a new report today on the widespread use of conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) and its devastating impacts on individuals and communities, which can last generations and undermine peace and security efforts.

Sexual violence is used as a weapon of war by combatants in conflict situations worldwide, decimating societies and fueling displacement. It remains a silent crime, with an estimated 80 percent of cases in conflict settings going unreported.

This fall, GIWPS convened leaders from Ukraine, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Colombia to share lessons learned for responding to the global scourge of CRSV. Drawing on their insights, this report presents actionable policy recommendations for key stakeholders to hold perpetrators accountable, meet survivor needs, and follow through on their commitments to deliver justice. The report, authored by Jess Keller, was made possible with support from the Embassy of Germany in Washington, D.C.

Key Recommendations

“Pathways to Justice and Accountability for Conflict-Related Sexual Violence: Lessons Learned and Policy Recommendations from the Frontlines” outlines detailed actions for the international community to hold perpetrators of CRSV accountable and meet survivors’ needs. Recommendations include:

Provide urgent survivor-centered medical and psychosocial services that include health care, legal assistance, and psychosocial support and address intersectional needs.

Co-create evidence-collection and documentation processes with survivors; prioritize data security and confidentiality; and train health workers, community leaders, police officers, judges, prosecutors, and qualified psychologists to minimize the risk of re-traumatization.

Challenge shame and transform stigma by amplifying survivor voices and leveraging community leadership.

Pursue criminal justice and accountability by strengthening national and subnational justice mechanisms, granting legal recognition to survivors, and utilizing sanctions to clearly and publicly condemn perpetrators and enablers.

Prioritize interim and comprehensive reparations to provide support, recognition, and compensation to survivors that address both immediate needs and post-conflict recovery.

Washington, DC: Georgetown University, Institute for Women, Peace and Security , 2024. 20p.

By Diogo G. C. Britto, Gianmarco Daniele, Marco Le Moglie, Paolo Pinotti, Breno Sampaio

We study the prevalence and effects of individuals with past criminal charges among candidates and elected politicians in Brazil. Individuals with past criminal charges are twice as likely to both run for office and be elected compared to other individuals. This pattern persists across political parties and government levels, even when controlling for a broad set of observable characteristics. Randomized anti-corruption audits reduce the share of mayors with criminal records, but only when conducted in election years. Using a regression discontinuity design focusing on close elections, we demonstrate that the election of mayors with criminal backgrounds leads to higher rates of underweight births and infant mortality. Additionally, there is an increase in political patronage, particularly in the health sector, which is consistent with the negative impacts on local public health outcomes.

Bonn:  IZA – Institute of Labor Economics, 2024. 60p.

By Erin Hammers Forstag, Rapporteur; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

Predictive policing strategies are approaches that use data to attempt to predict either individuals who are likely to commit crime or places where crime is likely to be committed, to enable crime prevention. To explore law enforcement's use of person-based and place-based predictive policing strategies, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a two-day public workshop on June 24 and 25, 2024.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2024. 14 pages

By Kevin Petersen, Christopher S. Koper, Bruce G. Taylor, Weiwei Liu, Jackie Sheridan-Johnson

Police use-of-force is a growing public health concern, with recent estimates suggesting that over 70,000 people are injured by police each year. To reduce the risk of injury to civilians, most police agencies authorize the use of various less-lethal weapons. However, to date, there is little consensus as to which types of less-lethal weapons are most effective at reducing injury risk. In this study, we test the differential effects of less-lethal weapons on civilian injury and injury severity using data on 2348 use-of-force incidents originating from 17 large urban and metropolitan law enforcement agencies from 2015 to 2019. Specifically, we assess the injury risks associated with conducted energy devices, chemical agents, impact weapons, and police canines, while controlling for a robust set of officer, civilian, and situational characteristics. Our results indicate that chemical agents reduce the risk of hospitalization or death significantly more than other weapon types, while police canines increase the risk of all injury outcomes significantly more than other weapon types. Adjusting for incident characteristics, chemical agents are predicted to cause hospitalization or death in 4% of cases, compared to 13% for conducted energy devices, 16% for impact weapons, and 37% for police canines. These findings suggest that civilian injury may be reduced through use-of-force policies that prioritize less severe modalities of force, though more research is needed on the contextual and long-term effects of these weapons.

Journal of Urban Health; November, 2024

By  Elizabeth Monkus, Kaitlyn Filip, Jennifer Won Young Lee, and Hanna Sharif-Kazemi

Since early 2020, Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts and the Chicago Council of Lawyers have been evaluating the Domestic Violence Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County, with a specific focus on the Domestic Violence Courthouse at 555 West Harrison in Chicago. Today, we release our findings in our report, “Slipping through the Cracks” – An Evaluation of Cook County’s Domestic Violence Division in Chicago. The consolidated Domestic Violence Courthouse opened in 2005 at 555 West Harrison in Chicago, in response to growing concerns about crowding, case processing times, and safety concerns with the conditions in the existing court buildings at 1340 South Michigan (for criminal proceedings) and at 28 North Clark Street (for civil proceedings). The consolidated courthouse hears all Orders of Protection cases, both criminal and civil, and was structured to create secure waiting areas with the intent of keeping petitioners and respondents away from each other in the courthouse. In addition to safety goals, the courthouse was intended to improve case efficiency. In 2010, the Circuit Court of Cook County established the Domestic Violence Division to further these goals. Beyond a task force study of the DV Court in 2008 and another more limited study in 2021, both convened by Chief Judge Evans, there has been no comprehensive study of the efficacy of the courthouse. Our report seeks to remedy this.

Background & History

When the Courthouse opened in 2005, there were around 50 dedicated domestic violence courts in the country. By 2010, there were over 200. This growth in domestic violence courts offers an opportunity to examine the successes and failures of Cook County’s courthouse while discovering alternatives to the processes which may improve its functionality. The courts are increasingly called upon to fill in gaps for diminishing social safety resources. This is especially evident in family courts, like those hearing domestic violence issues, and has profound implications for understanding systemic bias. Just as society’s conception of domestic violence has shifted over 50 years, so has our understanding of how poverty and marginalized identities are criminalized and otherwise punished by systems of power. It is incumbent on courts to examine if and how practices support biased systems and seek correction to those practices.  In February 2020, Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts was invited by a group of advocates and attorneys working in the Domestic Violence Division to join them in designing and implementing a court-watching project, given rising concerns over management and culture in the Division. Our goal in doing so was to improve not only access to courts, but the quality and function of justice within those courts.  For this study, Chicago Appleseed and the Council conducted interviews with more than 35 attorneys, non-attorney advocates, community service providers, court staff, and judges between July 2020 and March 2022. These interviewees provided information about their direct experiences in the Domestic Violence Division—in both the branch courts and the Chicago courthouse—as well as about their general experiences serving the needs of both survivors, their families, and perpetrators of harm. Likewise, Chicago Appleseed’s court-watching program deployed volunteers to observe 188 domestic violence cases in the Circuit Court of Cook County February and March of 2022. This qualitative information, along with background research into jurisdictional differences and best practices, provided information for our analysis. Nonetheless, we ran into several limitations in our research, including an inability to access quantitative data on the courts, which meant we could not fully understand things like sociodemographic information of litigants or length/outcome of cases, as well as issues connecting with litigants to interview about their direct experiences in the courthouse. Our findings and recommendations, therefore, are based in the analysis of interviews and observations with reference to background research.

Summary of Findings & Recommendations

Our findings stress that the courthouse is critical infrastructure and the Division is structured in an appropriate manner, but identify four major deficiencies:

1. Systemic racism and sexism, which is evident in the structures and procedures of the Domestic Violence Courthouse;

2. A general disconnect between judges and court staff and the needs of litigants, which is exacerbated by technology and training issues and limited operational capacity;

3. Judicial culture and bias, lack of trauma-informed practice, and the need for training, which severely impacts quality of justice; and

4. Issues with the Clerk of the Court’s Office, which are consistent and pervasive, creating barriers to access for both litigants and attorneys.

Broadly, it appears that the Domestic Violence Division is under-resourced to address these needs and (at least until recently) there has been a cycle of neglect regarding community concerns about the court, which exacerbated these barriers to justice.

 Chicago: Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts and the Chicago Council of Lawyers., 2022.    91p.

By Brady United

On February 5, 2019, a group of New Mexico Sheriffs, acting under the umbrella of the New Mexico Sheriffs’ Association (NMSA), surprisingly issued a Declaration opposing common sense gun violence prevention (GVP) bills being considered by the state legislature. These sheriffs pressured local and state politicians to oppose these measures that aim to protect the public safety and lives of New Mexicans. The sheriffs’ effort resulted in 25 counties passing so-called “Second Amendment Sanctuary resolutions,” including resolutions designed to undermine the American system of checks and balances by expressing support for sheriffs who unilaterally announced that they would not enforce such public safety laws. Brady immediately suspected that the gun lobby was behind the effort to encourage these sheriffs to go rogue and not enforce the law. Accordingly, Brady filed requests for documents from each of these sheriffs’ offices under New Mexico’s public records act (IPRA). The documents that Brady has obtained thus far show how the NRA infiltrated the NMSA; the prevalence of conspiracy theories among these sheriffs; their disregard for the American system of checks and balances and the rule of law; and a worrisome dedication to not enforcing laws aimed at protecting the lives and public safety of their own constituents.  

Washington, DC: Brady United Against Gun Violence, 2019. 8p.

By Nancy Lieberman Charities 

  In 2016, the Dallas, Texas, community and its police department faced one of its most brutal days. That summer, a standoff and shooting in downtown Dallas resulted in the deaths of four Dallas Police Department (DPD) officers and a Dallas Area Rapid Transit officer. The lone shooter was motivated by his perceptions of police racism and brutality toward African American people. Barely a week after the shooting, then-chief David Brown called Basketball Hall of Famer Nancy Lieberman to discuss using Dream Courts, a core program of Nancy Lieberman Charities that builds state-of-the-art outdoor basketball courts in underserved areas, as a tool to help heal divisions in the city. The mission of Nancy Lieberman Charities was not originally oriented toward law enforcement. Nancy Lieberman Charities is an education and wellness nonprofit organization focused on assisting underserved youth in the educational field. But as a result of that conversation, we developed our Kids & Cops programming, which has now been deployed in partnership with law enforcement agencies on Dream Courts across the country. The Kids & Cops initiative aims to make basketball more accessible to kids by giving them an inexpensive recreational outlet, a safe place to play, the chance to interact socially, and a path to learning the importance of teamwork and good sportsmanship. It is a sustainable program to help build and strengthen the bond between local officers and their communities. Our goal is for this guide to give law enforcement agencies an alternative perspective on serving the community as a law enforcement agency or agency partner. Nancy Lieberman Charities is not a task force or law enforcement agency—rather, we are an organization with an outside perspective on positive community relationship building.   

Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.  2023. 24p.

By Frank Rudy Cooper 

There is a new police criticism. Numerous high-profile police killings of unarmed blacks between 2012 and 2016 sparked the movements that came to be known as Black Lives Matter, #SayHerName, and so on. That criticism merges race-based activism with intersectional concerns about violence against women, including trans women. There is also a new police resistance to criticism. It fits within the tradition of the “Blue Wall of Silence,” but also includes a new pro-police movement known as Blue Lives Matter. The Blue Lives Matter movement makes the dubious claim that there is a war on police and counterattacks by calling for making assaults on police hate crimes akin to those addressing attacks on historically oppressed groups. Legal scholarship has not comprehensively considered the impact of the new police criticism on the police. It is especially remiss in attending to the implications of Blue Lives Matter as police resistance to criticism. This Article is the first to do so. This Article illuminates a heretofore unrecognized source of police resistance to criticism by utilizing diversity trainer and New York Times best-selling author Robin DiAngelo’s recent theory of white fragility. “White fragility” captures many whites’ reluctance to discuss ongoing racism, or even that whiteness creates a distinct set of experiences and perspectives. White fragility is based on two myths: the ideas that one could be an unraced and purely neutral individual—false objectivity—and that only evil people perpetuate racial subordination—bad intent theory. Cop fragility is an analogous oversensitivity to criticism that blocks necessary conversations about race and policing. Blue Lives Matter exemplifies false objectivity when it asserts that police should be their judges of what is appropriate in law enforcement. Likewise, Blue Lives Matter relies on bad intent theory when it implies that only a few “bad apples” create racial disparities. Cop fragility is dangerous because it blames the victims of police misconduct, constructs a false victim status for the police, and undermines civil rights. Racial minority communities will only give police the cooperation they need if they perceive the police to be listening to them. This Article’s specific proposal is for police departments to hold mediated listening sessions with the new police critics based on a proven methodology for mediating difficult conversations. The goal is to identify reforms that would rebuild community trust of the police. These listening sessions hold the potential to turn police resistance to criticism into meaningful cooperation 

622 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LAW REVIEW [Vol. 2020       

By Hayli Millar, Yvon Dandurand , Marcella Chan With the Assistance of Abeni Steegstra, Raelyn O’Hara, and Kia Neilsen 

The international community is attempting to eliminate forced labour and the worst forms of child labour, including hazardous work likely to harm children’s health, safety, or morals. Child and forced labour can be present at various points of a company’s supply chains, often out of sight of buyers, labour inspectors, and consumers. Many governments have resorted to legislation to motivate companies to be more transparent about their supply chains and to adopt due diligence measures to prevent child and forced labour. At present, there is no specific supply chain transparency legislation in Canada. Canadian private companies under applicable securities legislation do not have an obligation to disclose material labour exploitation risks within their supply chains. Given the complex, evolving and often obscure nature of supply chains, too many Canadian companies fail to offer consumers any meaningful environment, social or governance disclosure. As a result, consumers are unaware of whether the products and services at local Canadian retailers have connections to human rights abuses or detrimental environmental practices. At the same time, companies increasingly feel the pressure from investors, consumers, NGOs, industry associations and others to disclose and address the risks of labour exploitation in their supply chains. To prevent and eliminate child and forced labour, a new statutory framework may be needed to clearly define the transparency and due diligence obligations of enterprises throughout their operations and supply chains. In their efforts to prevent and combat child and forced labour globally, national and regional governments are increasingly turning to mandated disclosure (transparency) and due diligence regimes as an indirect method of regulating corporate behaviour throughout various supply chains. Recent disclosure laws require companies to provide information on their global supply chains, including due diligence measures that they have taken to prevent human rights violations by third-party suppliers. Some of these laws now extend beyond targeted due diligence in preventing child and forced labour and apply more comprehensively to the prevention of human rights violations and harmful environment practices. There is also a growing tendency for these laws to impose some specific due diligence or duty of care obligations on the companies they cover. Effective monitoring, investigation and enforcement mechanisms then become necessary to ensure accountability, along with ensuring access to judicial and non-judicial remedies for those whose rights have been violated. The thematic focus of this Guide on forced labour and child labour is intentional and timely given that 2021 is the International Year for the Elimination of Child Labour – 2021.1 The Guide was developed to assist policy makers and legislators, in Canada and elsewhere, in making policy choices and designing  legislation that will achieve an optimum impact on the elimination of child and forced labour. The Guide presents and discusses a range of legislative options and examples that policymakers and legislators may wish to consider in the development of supply chains transparency and due diligence legislation. The goal being to establish a statutory duty of care requiring businesses to take reasonable steps to avoid the use of forced labour, child labour, and human trafficking in their operations abroad, and to report publicly on these due diligence steps and their impact. The Guide fits within the broader international anti-slavery policy developments of the last decade or so, including the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the global standard for corporate human rights obligations. The development of effective legislation may be more urgent than ever given the fact that the major supply chain disruptions caused by climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic are not only responsible for slowing down the economic recovery, but also weakening the capacity of enterprises to ensure that their supply chains are not buoyed by child or forced labour. As businesses embark on the journey to recovery, supply-chain leaders are resorting to various strategies to make their supply chains far more flexible and agile, including dual sourcing of raw materials and near-shoring, or regionalizing their supply chains. As business leaders are seeking to deeply and quickly transform their supply chains, new risks emerge that must be managed in order to prevent child labour, forced labour and other human rights violations within their supply chains. At this time, many businesses are looking to establish and improve their dedicated supply-chain riskmanagement functions and processes and adopt voluntary standards for environmental, social and governance. They could be persuaded to include due diligence and reporting practices in these processes to manage the risks and potential liability associated with suppliers and partners that are less scrupulous about preventing human rights abuses. Failing to address human rights issues can create significant business risk.2 There is certainly a lot of interest among businesses in how to measure and report their social impacts and many of them have adopted voluntary standards. However, states must act to ensure that businesses do more than “launder their reputation”.3 The Guide is divided into two main parts. A first part establishes a context for the guidance offered, including a cursory review of the Canadian legislative landscape and the international policy framework for responsible business conduct. A second part offers a discussion of the various choices a legislator must consider in designing a supply chains transparency and due diligence statute that can hold business enterprises accountable for their efforts to prevent child labour and forced labour. That second part has six main sections: 1. The purpose, scope, and application of the legislation 2. The designation of the entities to be covered by the legislation 3. Creating disclosure and reporting obligations 4. Creating specific due diligence and accountability obligations 5. Complaints and grievance mechanisms, and potential remedies 6. Responsibility for the administration and enforcement of the law. The specific due diligence obligations imposed by the legislation The reader will also find two tables at the end of the Guide, one summarizing existing international standards and policy guidance instruments and one summarizing the main features of various relevant national legislation. For those readers already familiar with the Canadian context and the applicable international legal standards, they may find it easier to start with Part 2 of the Guide.   

Vancouver, BC:  International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy , 2022. 83p.