POLITICS

California Police Victims of Violations May Finally Get Justice in Court – Reason.com


California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a series of police reform bills yesterday as the state seeks to open the door to police accountability, strengthen education and training, and reduce some force enforcement strategies.

Perhaps most fruitful was Senate Bill (SB) 2, which would create a decriminalization program for officers to misbehave so they could no longer go to any law enforcement agency after losing their jobs. California was one of only four states where such rules did not exist.

“Ditionally, what they’ve been able to do is if they break the law – they’ve committed a crime – and when they’re being investigated by their own department, they just give a resignation, and when they go there, there’s no negative sign in their employment.” Julia Yu, president of the National Police Accountability Project, the country’s largest civil rights organization, said. “They can honestly say, ‘I was not fired from my previous job.’ … So they get hired by their second division, and the first investigation just goes away. It launches. It enables some officers who have committed serious misconduct to continue to be employed. “

The bill brings together a nine-person advisory board-reviewing some misconduct claims from political appointees, law enforcement এবং and deciding whether an officer’s license should be suspended or revoked. Those who lose two-thirds of the vote can appeal.

Also noteworthy is the removal of certain immunity that protects police officers from accountability in civil court, as they allege that they have violated someone’s constitutional rights.

Qualified immunity has been at the center of the police reform debate since last year. Legal doctrine prohibits victims of government abuse from suing certain state actors if their rights are properly violated, unless the court’s previous instance is clearly deemed unconstitutional. This has encouraged some misconduct, including police who stole $ 225,000 during a search warrant, as no previous rule has ruled that the theft was wrong in this particular situation. It also rescued a policeman who killed a man who was sleeping in his car, a group of policemen who beat a man after he was dragged for a broken taillight, and a policeman who knocked a suspect in the eye 20 to 30 times have already been subdued.

But California state courts make appointments under certain circumstances Absolutely Immunity, even overcoming a long hurdle, because it provides full protection to government actors in such cases despite the relevant lawsuits. Federal police currently have the same ield, for example, an officer of a federal task force was able to avoid any civilian punishment after he was imprisoned on false charges of making a fake sex-trafficking ring. The SB2 Reels for California Officers, although the immunity worthy of any lawsuit brought to federal court, remains land law, as Congress has recently expressed some resentment over the police reform agreement.

Other states that have recently limited police immunity include New Mexico and Colorado, as well as New York City at the municipal level.

Since his idea, police unions have pushed back some steps. For example, the decriminalization section was originally proposed last year as part of a different law that led to rapid deaths after objections from various police advocacy groups. The Peace Officers Research Association, a law enforcement lobby, said that while many of their concerns have been addressed, SB2 still provides a vague, subjective and vague definition of “serious misconduct”. The law was amended long before the bill was approved in an effort to allay the concerns of the California legislature lobby. It has passed with many moderate Democrats refusing to vote – perhaps a sign of how influential police unions are in blue states like California.

Immunity was also exempted. “When trying to sue a police officer, you have to prove that you have what is called ‘specific intent’, and the problem with ‘specific intent’ is that no one knows what it means,” depending on the personal opinion of anyone on the bench. By Yu said law enforcement lobbies were able to keep that “extra level” in the law.



Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button