Police Reform Bill Is Not Cut and Dry
There are no easy answers in the package sent to Governor Hogan
The General Assembly has sent a slew of police reform bills to the desk of Governor Larry Hogan.
This bill package is a series of complicated proposals that are not entirely what everybody wants when it comes to police reform. The Sun summarizes the bill here.
Whether the proposals are good are bad probably depends on what side of the political aisle you sit on. Like most things though, this is more of a shades of gray issue. Each function of the proposals should be looked at separately. Let’s take a look at each:
New all-civilian committees — rather than trial boards of fellow officers — would consider evidence and decide whether officers should be disciplined: In reality, the Chiefs and/or Sheriffs are the ones who take care of the initial issuance or discipline. They will now be forced to select a legislated punishment that fits the offense. It’s basically “mandatory minimums” for police officers. The irony of police reform advocates, many of whom oppose mandatory minimums in criminal sentencing, supporting mandatory minimums for police discipline should not be lost on anybody.
Where things really get complicated is in the new review board that officers can appeal to. The review board consists of an officer, a civilian, and a judge. This has the potential to complicate the process and involve politics in a process that is already too politicized. I’m not sure that these changes make things any better than they are now.All county-level law enforcement agencies in Maryland would have to adopt body cameras by July 2025: It’s ridiculous that there are county-level police forces that don’t have body cameras.
A new statewide standard for when officers can use force — and new criminal penalties of up to 10 years in prison for serious violations: The Sun notes that this is “among the package’s most controversial” pieces of the reform package and that’s rather obvious. I’m going to guess that those writing these standards have never been sworn officers of the law and had to make life-or-death decisions in a split-second. Are there times where police officers make the wrong choice: absolutely. Nobody will argue that. But what this will likely do is deter good officers from making the decision to use deadly force when necessary and will not stop bad officers from making the decision to use deadly force when it’s not. This is going to deter good officers from doing the right thing. The consequences of this have the potential to be deadly.
A newly created unit within the Maryland attorney general’s office would investigate all police killings of civilians: a new bureaucratic level to investigate these when, ultimately, these cases would still be prosecuted by local states attorneys makes little sense than to involve a statewide elected official in what is, ultimately, a local process.
The package puts new limits on what kinds of surplus gear Maryland law enforcement agencies in Maryland can obtain from the U.S. Department of Defense: Good. Surplus military gear in the hands of local officers has been a problem in Maryland for years.
The public would be allowed to request disciplinary records and internal affairs complaints lodged against officers: The idea works in principle, but the law botches the execution because investigations found to be unfounded are unwarranted will still be subject to public release? What exactly is this supposed to accomplish other than to unfairly tarnish the reputations of innocent officers?
No-knock warrants can only be done if demonstrating a regular warrant would save laws and can be only executed between 8am and 7pm except in emergencies: Good. There should be a very limited number of instances in which a no-knock warrant is used. Too many no-knock warrants have ended in senseless deaths when people are startled, cops hit the wrong house or the creation of mass confusion.
A scholarship fund would cover 50% of college tuition and fees for Maryland residents who agree to spend at least five years after graduation working as an officer in the state: Good idea.
The package more than doubles the amount of money plaintiffs can win in lawsuits over police misconduct filed in Maryland state courts, raising the cap from $400,000 to $890,000: I’m not entirely sure there should be limits in the first place given the circumstances of why a police misconduct lawsuit may end up in court in the first place.
Other things, including funding rejection and the stripping of pensions, did not make it in the final cut.
It’s a good thing that these proposals were passed separately. That gives the Governor some wiggle room regarding which parts will be passed and which parts will not. But what is not healthy is the idea that folks should think that the Governor should reject these on a blanket basis. As the Governor said, “some of the worst possible stuff along with some positive reforms” are included in the overall package. No serious person should say that all the police reforms included herein should be signed, and no serious person should say that all of them should be blank vetoed either.
What is good is that, for the most part, the General Assembly avoided passing reforms that echoed the mass hysteria on the radical left about police. We have seen far too many cities and states gut their police departments, with disastrous results. We’ve avoided that, for now in Maryland. But there are elements within the Democratic caucus that would support such recklessness.
It will be interesting to see a few things going forward. First, what Governor Hogan does with the legislation. It is likely to be overturned if he vetoes it based on the vote count. But also, what will the electorate think about this next year. Some Democrats who voted for these proposals will get attacked from the left that they voted for a weak package that did not go far enough. Some Democrats in competitive districts will get attacked from the right to caving to the radical left. Throw in redistricting and the potential for single-member districts, and we have no idea what the political impact of this will be next year and beyond.
All in all, some of these reforms are good. Some of these are bad. Let’s hope we can get to a point where we keep the good changes and jettison the ones that will negatively impact both officers and communities.