This is one half of a pair of posts today suggesting ways you can work to address one specific facet of racism in our society: violent policing. For the other post, click here or visit our home page.
In a few weeks, black squares will most likely not dominate our Instagram feeds. The homicide of George Floyd, and the events stemming from that homicide, will most likely not dominate the news. For the vast majority of us who are not oppressed by it every day, racism will most likely not dominate our thoughts. There’s a moment to be seized here. Many, ourselves included, would like to see it seized.
Social media has been ablaze the past eight or nine days with ways to combat racism. Two specific methods we believe to be essential are supporting organizations who advocate for progress full-time; and combating our own personal, implicit (or possibly even explicit) racism. If you’re on social media, you’ve likely seen lists highlighting these organizations, as well as resources to help begin or continue your work within yourself. If you’re not on social media, or you’re struggling to find these organizations or resources, feel free to reach out to us via Instagram or Twitter or Email (allthingsnit@gmail.com), so we can do our best to connect you with what you’re seeking.
One specific facet of racism that’s receiving attention right now, for obvious reasons, is violent policing. Policing, by its nature, is connected to our nation’s government, and while it’s primarily a local issue (see our other post today for more on that), there are aspects the federal government impacts.
Contacting your representative and senators about these issues (use this link to find your representative, and this link to find your senators, and their individual webpages to find their office phone numbers) is not the only thing you can do. We wouldn’t even argue it’s the most important thing you can do (we highlighted the two issues above for a reason). But it’s something you can do, and if you’re interested, here are two measures you can support:
Ending or Altering Qualified Immunity
Representative Justin Amash announced yesterday that he’ll be introducing legislation this week to end Qualified Immunity. It’s unclear what the bill’s chances will be of passing, but Representative Ilhan Omar is reportedly expected to back it.
What, though, is Qualified Immunity?
The Appeal explains it more thoroughly than I’m qualified to do, but the short explanation is that Qualified Immunity is a Supreme Court doctrine stating that a police officer can only be found liable in a civil rights lawsuit if the officer’s violation of the victim’s constitutional rights is not only a violation of the Constitution, but is also a violation of “clearly established” rights. In practice, this means the victim has to be able to cite a previous Supreme Court decision or federal appeals court decision in the same jurisdiction stating that the exact conduct of the officer in the exact circumstances of the event were unconstitutional.
Two examples, from this piece Sunday in USA Today:
…last November the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held that Tennessee cops who allowed their police dog to bite a surrendered suspect did not violate clearly established law. There, the victim cited a case where the same court earlier held that it was unconstitutional for officers to sic their dog on a suspect who had surrendered by lying on the ground with his hands to the side. That was not sufficient, the court reasoned, because the victim had not surrendered by lying down: He had surrendered by sitting on the ground and raising his hands.
And in February, the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held that a Texas prison guard who pepper sprayed an inmate in his locked cell “for no reason” did not violate clearly established law because similar cited cases involved guards who had hit and tased inmates for no reason, rather than pepper spraying them for no reason.
If this sounds absurd to you, you’re not alone. A growing stack of Qualified Immunity cases have been piling up at the Supreme Court in recent years, and there are expectations that the court will modify Qualified Immunity soon. How soon, though, is unclear, as is what the modifications would be. By passing such legislation as Amash is introducing, Congress would eliminate the need for the Supreme Court to rule on the matter by eliminating any notion of legal ambiguity, thereby taking the decision out of the hands of the courts, whose job is to interpret laws.
It should be noted that Qualified Immunity only applies in civil cases—it is not an obstacle to criminal charges. Meaning, Derek Chauvin’s lawyers cannot invoke Qualified Immunity in his defense against criminal charges of murder and manslaughter, but they can invoke it in the event George Floyd’s family sues for damages and there is a separate, civil trial.
Ending or Altering the “1033 Program”
The “1033 program” is a system in which the United States Department of Defense is permitted to transfer military equipment to state and local law enforcement agencies. It’s not entirely clear exactly what percentage of the military equipment used by police is acquired through this program, but there’s compelling evidence to suggest the mere presence of this military equipment leads to heightened violence at protests, and that’s before considering the significance of violence the equipment enables on the part of the police. For more on that, we suggest this piece from FiveThirtyEight, published yesterday, and this piece from the Washington Post, published in 2016 and linked to on our site this past Thursday.
Senator Brian Schatz and Representative Ruben Gallego have each, over the last three days, announced their intention to curtail or eliminate the 1033 program through Congress—Schatz via an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, Gallego via action in the House Armed Services Committee. The implication is that this would significantly affect police departments’ ability to gain access to military equipment, cutting off at least some of the supply of these particular instruments of violence, which do not appear to be useful for everyday policing, nor productive in keeping protests peaceful. As Gallego, a combat veteran, stated in his announcement, “Our neighborhoods aren’t warzones.”
It’s unclear what, exactly, this legislation or Congressional action will entail, and it’s unclear what its chances will be of passing or taking effect. It is worth noting that Schatz has made previous similar attempts, co-sponsoring a bill with Rand Paul with similar aims.
***
These are just two examples of pending legislation in Congress, and calling your representative and senators is just one way of taking action to combat racism. But if you’re so inclined, call your representative, and call your senators, and express support for ending or altering Qualified Immunity and/or ending or altering the 1033 program.
