The stories you want. The opinions that matter.
No, thanks
Tag: fraternal order of police
thin blue line flag

When The Cops Are Their Own Worst Enemies

You may have seen it: a black and white American flag with one stripe highlighted in blue. The Thin Blue Line flag is used meant to show solidarity with the police. As Thin Blue Line USA says, it "represents all who faithfully serve and protect. A line that separates order from chaos, and a line that represents all who serve and all who stand for #justice."

Early on the morning of June 1, most of those who make up the thin blue line of the Chicago Police Department were straining to deal with hooligans. But according to Mayor Lori Lightfoot and Police Superintendent David Brown, 13 of their fellow officers were taking it easy in the burglarized campaign office of Rep. Bobby Rush as nearby shops were being ransacked.

Read NowShow less
The Trump Administration Is Giving Cops Unprecedented Power

The Trump Administration Is Giving Cops Unprecedented Power

Reprinted with permission from AlterNet.

The Donald Trump administration is off to a rocky start, with multiple damaging reports emerging from the White House alleging disorganization, incompetence, and infighting—but that hasn’t stopped the new president from making good on his pledges to the country’s police officers. By branding himself the law-and-order candidate who would use his bully pulpit to take down criminals and fight crime, Trump earned himself the support of several police groups, most notably the Fraternal Order of Police, the country’s largest police union, which boasts more than 330,000 members.

Trump has already met with several law enforcement groups to make it clear where his priorities lie. Recently, while speaking to the Major Cities Chiefs Police Association (and after whining about a federal judge ruling that blocked his Muslim ban), Trump launched into a speech about what he believes cops in this country care about: crime in cities populated with black people, Mexican drug cartels, undocumented immigrants, and his desire to build a wall along the Mexican border. During the speech he claimed that undocumented immigrants in gangs cause the problems in Chicago and that building a wall along our southern border would stop drugs from “pouring” into our country.

Two weeks after signing two orders on immigration, President Trump signed three orders on crime and law enforcement, including one that targeted transnational drug cartels. Although immigration and drug enforcement have their own federal agencies, many cops seemed eager to jump into the fray, setting the stage to begin rolling back modest gains made in holding police accountable.

One of President Trump’s first executive orders on immigration revived a program dubbed Secure Communities and promised to defund jurisdictions known as sanctuary cities that choose not to enforce federal immigration laws. (Notably, law enforcement officials would be exempt from losing funds.) Under Secure Communities, local authorities—like jail officials—would share fingerprints of the individuals arrested in their cities and towns with the FBI, who would then send the information along to the Department of Homeland Security to check if that person is eligible for deportation using Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s database. If ICE determines that the individual is eligible, the local authorities are instructed to hold that person in jail until ICE can transfer him or her to a detention center.

The federal government stated that the intent of the program was to target the most serious offenders, but the program was disbanded in 2014 after it led to widespread racial profiling of Latinos, arrests of people who committed low-level offenses and people without criminal records. During the course of Secure Communities, multiple cities chose to opt out.

But despite widespread criticism of the program, some police officers are applauding its revival and the crackdown on sanctuary cities. The Fraternal Order of Police praised the administration’s actions, including the revocation of federal funds, alleging that communities are safer when local authorities comply with federal immigration officials.

While police unions appear eager to partner up with federal immigration officials, their relationship with the federal agency that handles investigations into police departments is much rockier. Ramping up Department of Justice investigations into police departments that violate the civil rights of the citizens they have sworn to protect is perhaps Obama’s greatest police reform achievement. Investigations usually end with court-ordered agreements dedicated to reform, sometimes called consent decrees. While these investigations are not a cure-all, it was a welcome change for many activists. But just days after the election, police departments started making noise about DOJ-mandated reforms.

The Cleveland Police Department entered into an agreement with the Department of Justice in 2015 after the DOJ issued a damning report on the police department the previous year; the head of the city’s police union, Steve Loomis, was not part of the agreement, but that hasn’t stopped him from inferring that Trump will help make changes to the consent decree. Loomis said that the Trump administration is “cognizant of the false narrative that’s out there and [will] be hesitant to make major decisions based on false narratives.” Days before the report was released, a white officer shot and killed 12-year-old Tamir Rice, who was playing with a toy gun in a park. No one was charged for his death.

But now the DOJ will be led by Jeff Sessions, the former Alabama attorney general and U.S. senator, who was deemed too racist to be a federal judge in 1986. The new attorney general voiced concerns about consent decrees at his Senate hearing for the position. Sessions seemed to play into the “few bad apples” rhetoric despite reports from Ferguson, Chicago, and Baltimore pointing to the opposite. “These lawsuits undermine the respect for police officers,” he said, “and create an impression that the entire department is not doing their work consistent with fidelity to law and fairness.”

Since the inauguration, Americans across the country have taken to the streets to protest Donald Trump’s actions. While some law enforcement leaders want to see the Trump administration tackle mass incarceration and enhance community policing, many more cops are embracing the Trump era. The National Sheriffs’ Association and Major County Sheriffs’ Association released a joint statement after President Trump signed the three executive orders related to law enforcement. “We thank the President and welcome the nation’s re-awakening of support for law enforcement, the rule of law, and the need to protect our borders and enhance the nation’s criminal justice system.”

Cheering moves that enable cops to crack down on undocumented immigrants and alleged gang members, but balking at the federal agency designed to rein in unaccountability, signals deeper trouble up ahead.

Nathalie Baptiste is a freelance writer based in Washington, D.C. Follow her on Twitter: @nhbaptiste.

IMAGE: A reporter talks to police dressed in tactical gear as they block a downtown street during a march by various groups, including “Black Lives Matter” and “Shut Down Trump and the RNC”. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson

Police Endorsement of Donald Trump Bodes Ill For Justice

Police Endorsement of Donald Trump Bodes Ill For Justice

The video footage of the shooting death of Terence Crutcher at the hands of a Tulsa police officer is extremely disturbing and evokes visceral reactions: fear, outrage, panic. In view of the camera, Crutcher is seen walking slowly to his car, his empty hands raised over his head. Without any apparent provocation, he’s gunned down.

I have to exercise mental discipline — making a conscious effort to replace emotion with reason — to remember a simple truth: Not every police officer treats all black men as violent thugs, and not every law enforcement official harbors hidden racial biases that provoke disturbing overreactions.

I know that it’s wrong to assume that all police officers behave like jackbooted storm troopers, just as it’s wrong to believe all black men are criminals-in-waiting. (It’s also wrong to believe that all Black Lives Matter protestors behave like the Charlotte mob, who, angry about the shooting death of another black man at the hands of police, have turned peaceful demonstrations into days and nights of carnage.) Tulsa police officer Betty Shelby, who killed Crutcher, has not been convicted of any crime and is innocent until proven guilty.

That’s all within the bounds of rational thinking. None of us should give in to the dictates of our lizard brains, which continue to pass on judgments from our primal pasts.

That’s why I’m so troubled by the news that the Fraternal Order of Police has given its endorsement to Donald Trump. If police officers want the broad support of the nation — the trust of a diverse citizenry — why in the world would the FOP support Trump?

That’s not one or two or 10 police officers. That’s the nation’s largest police union giving its backing to a man who has lowered the bar for presidential campaigns by insulting Muslims, denigrating Mexicans and questioning the ethics of a federal judge because of his heritage.

Trump doesn’t merely pander to racial prejudices, engaging in the dog-whistles that have been standard for Republican candidates since the 1960s. He has issued full-throated cries of bigotry, starting with his enthusiastic indulgence in “birtherism,” a lie that insists President Barack Obama was not born in the United States. (While Trump renounced birtherism grudgingly in mid-September, he seemed to indicate barely a week later that he only did that so reporters would stop asking him about it.) The claim that Obama is foreign-born has been one of the more patently racist smears by his detractors, an attempt to delegitimize the presidency of the first black man to win the Oval Office.

Certainly, the union has every right to endorse whomever it chooses, and its members have every right to vote accordingly. Police officers tend to be conservative, and the FOP usually endorses the Republican presidential nominee. But that nominee isn’t usually a person who cozies up to Nazi sympathizers. The decision of the overwhelmingly white FOP to endorse him strongly suggests that it agrees with his views. (Some black FOP members have criticized the endorsement.)

(Similarly, the National Border Patrol Council, the union representing 16,500 border patrol agents, cast doubt on its members’ ability to be prudent and fair with its endorsement of Trump in April. It’s hard to imagine union members could protect the rights of immigrants, legal and illegal, when their endorsement suggests a deep well of xenophobia.)

The timing of the FOP’s endorsement could hardly be less fortunate. In communities across the country, relationships between police departments and black citizens are frayed by the deaths of unarmed black men at the hands of law enforcement officers. Police conduct is the subject of not only protests such as those led by the activists of Black Lives Matter, but also dramatic gestures by athletes such as NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick.

That charged atmosphere cries out for police leaders who project not only authority but also empathy, who appreciate diversity and communicate genuine respect for all citizens. The FOP has done the opposite. Its endorsement plays into the view — widespread in some precincts — that white police officers are waging war on neighborhoods of color.

Cynthia Tucker won the Pulitzer Prize for commentary in 2007. She can be reached at cynthia@cynthiatucker.com.