When the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) disfavors the policing methodologies of a municipal law enforcement agency, it seeks to impose a federal consent decree containing stipulations that one or more monitors oversee (overhaul) operations and ensure compliance with its conditions, leading to relative dilution of local government sovereignty.
In essence, the targeted police force is throttled down and relatively prohibited from certain traditional crimefighting practices, being scored on adherence to limitations set forth by national authority sidelining local leadership.
Some may call that federalizing.
In general, a federal consent decree is defined as “A formal agreement or settlement that resolves a dispute without either party having to admit guilt (in a criminal matter) or liability (in a civil matter).”
As a municipal cop whose police career was experienced in Florida, I have never worked under a federally imposed consent decree. We had an embodiment of elected figures who largely supported, consistently funded, and managerially aided its police department, including its traditional ways and means of law enforcement engaged in wrangling every manner of criminal activities and service to the citizenry. Sounds about right, right?
My esteemed NPA colleague, Steve Pomper experienced policing under a federal consent decree while working as a cop for the Seattle Police Department. He wrote about the dubious concept and takeaways.
Chronicling cities whose police entities were taken over by federal monitorship and bound by DOJ rules, a common denominator offered by the feds is cited as civil rights violations. No one anywhere wants constitutional principles stampeded by anyone. Biased policing, however, is ordinarily the stated context of a consent decree.
Biased policing; The thing that Harvard economist Roland Fryer studied extensively, at the outset citing “We didn’t find any racial bias in police shootings.” Seems we’ve heard this before. Incidentally, Professor Fryer’s life got shaky after his study and its findings were published.
Sounds like an honest guy. His integrity was cemented when he admitted doing the entire study twice (he seemingly expected different results, too, signaling some bias), the second time with an entire batch of fresh faces on the research assistant team. He was admonished not to publish his findings. Cops had to provide personal protection for 30-40 days. The irony!
I wonder how DOJ figureheads received Dr. Fryer’s findings.
Some police organizations are subjected to a federal consent decree that retools policies and procedures, such as pursuits of armed and violent perpetrators who will do anything to avoid handcuffs applied to their sinister tentacles.
Like any crime, small and large, preventing cops from fighting evildoers will hamper the former and embolden the latter. Are we not seeing indications of societal breakdown in certain cities ruled by a particular party?
Speaking of that party, it seems like solid logic that municipalities, counties, and states largely or exclusively governed by that ilk are poster children for the societal breakdown we referred to above. Are federal consent decrees a way for the national government to elbow its way into law enforcement agencies whose leadership is comprised of polar-opposite politics?
Lone Star State Sends Backup
Austin, Texas, is a notably liberal metropolis whose city limits brim with behaviors many find abhorrent. Understandably, a hefty number of Austin PD’s cops saw the writing on the wall, couldn’t see sound reasoning to stay put, and departed for greener (red) pastures.
Austin’s out-of-control atmosphere got so bad that Texas Governor Greg Abbott authorized state troopers with the Department of Public Safety (DPS) to make duty-boot prints in the southern city, an executive decision that was rebuked by local leadership that barked about outside authorities trying to safeguard the municipality and all taxpayers/visitors in it.
Austin’s example is similar to a federal consent decree but dissimilar in terms of reasoning and purpose: The state Department of Public Safety troopers forged forward and stepped in to quell festered anarchy and unmitigated mayhem with conventional law enforcement practices to stem the tide of criminal reign, underscoring public safety.
This, while the southern border remains a hemorrhage of non-citizens caravaning across the US/Mexico delineation and into America’s interior.
Hard Life in the Big Easy
Now, a bit to the east of Texas, New Orleans, Louisiana (NOLA) cops operating under a federal consent decree have Louisiana State Police (LSP) troopers assembled to combat crime in the Big Easy, making it harder for criminal elements to burgeon and pollute life for its citizens.
In early 2024, Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry convened a special troop, members of which are state law enforcement officers authorized to combat crime in the land known for Mardi Gras shenanigans and Cajun cuisine, with a mixed bag of crimes committed by people from all over who visit the landmark and unloose bizarre behavior.
From the pages of the Louisiana State Police, crime suppression progress in New Orleans is reportedly on the decline:
“Over the last several weeks, Louisiana State Police Troop NOLA has collaborated closely with our local, state, and federal partners to identify and apprehend criminals affecting the safety and security of the New Orleans community. Through proactive patrols and intelligence-led operations, Troopers are seizing illegal weapons and narcotics, recovering stolen vehicles, and making arrests on violent offenders. With the assistance of air support and other law enforcement resources, LSP is committed to apprehending these violent offenders while balancing the safety of the public, law enforcement, and the suspects involved in these incidents.
“In the last two weeks, Louisiana State Police Troop NOLA has conducted 102 traffic stops, seized 13 illegally possessed weapons, confiscated various illegal narcotics, recovered 7 stolen vehicles, and made 20 arrests for a range of felony and misdemeanor charges, including the apprehension of a fugitive homicide suspect. In addition to the immediate removal of dangerous weapons, narcotics, and violent offenders from the community, several of the arrests have launched broader criminal investigations into New Orleans area homicides, narcotics trafficking, and organized criminal activities.
(Photo courtesy of the Louisiana State Police.)
“Troop NOLA’s ongoing combination of proactive enforcement and community outreach remains a priority for the men and women of Louisiana State Police as we work together to improve the safety, security, and quality of life across the New Orleans Metropolitan Area.”
Shazam! How refreshing to learn of crime being quashed via traditional means, by troopers who swore an oath to do so, backed by elected officials with keen senses for law and order.
Going back to that malignant party thing again, the federal judge presiding over NOLA’s federal consent decree is an Obama appointee. Judge Susie Morgan is critical of the Louisiana State Police contingent activated in the Big Easy, critical of the governor’s move to police NOLA. (They do not like their script messed with by anyone.)
The hierarchy of jurisdictional scope is at play here…
State cops have statewide responsibility whereas city cops have a limited domain for public safety responsibilities. Federal law enforcement has a much wider berth, exercising national territorial authority, flexing it wherever the bouncing ball goes, including NOLA, where the ball doesn’t necessarily bounce through their hoops (to their liking).
As Texas Governor Abbott underscored when he instituted state troopers to restore public safety in out-of-control Austin, “The mission of the Texas Dept. of Public Safety is to serve and protect. Their jurisdiction is every square inch of Texas.” Ding-ding!
Whereas the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) policy prohibits vehicle pursuits —a would-be tenet of the federal consent decree imposed on the agency and its personnel— the Louisiana State Police pursuit policy differs, allowing car chases when criteria are established.
From what I read, LSP’s pursuit criteria range from darkly tinted windows to any worst-case scenario (naturally).
NOPD cops can’t necessarily chase cars (other than a few exceptions) but LSP troopers can.
From what I understand, all arrests made by LSP troopers will be prosecuted by the attorney general’s office, not NOLA’s district attorney whose legacy is denoted by the following aspects derived directly from District Attorney Jason Rogers Williams’s bio:
“…took a stand against President Trump’s controversial immigration policies, declaring that no New Orleans agency or officer would participate in any ICE raids or initiatives. Collaborating with fellow council members,” he “worked towards municipal bail reform and the decriminalization of marijuana,” demonstrative of Soros-like prosecutors who act more like public defenders representing criminals.
Guess who made the list of District Attorneys propped and funded by Soros…
(Image courtesy of the Foundation for Government Accountability.)
That pretty much says everything about how criminals are cared for while New Orleans cops are scrutinized for coughing aloud. Ironic, then, that New Orleans cops are accused of “biased policing,” a staple in the federal consent decree.
Federal Grants: The Ties That Bind
It is common practice that America’s law enforcement agencies submit grant applications for funding to equip its personnel and outfit its existence to enable the crimefighting mission and better the quality of life for its constituents. The federal government is a mega contributor of grant money to police organizations, thus creating the ties that bind. Fair enough.
With every grant received by each law enforcement entity, restrictions and stipulations are attached.
Ordinarily, grants are purposed for specific things. One my department received was for traffic control trailers placed at strategic locations around the city where chronic unlawful speed by motorists was a festering problem.
(Photo courtesy of All Traffic Solutions.)
Police departments and sheriff’s offices sometimes employ grant coordinators (non-sworn personnel) to oversee all equipment and programs funded via federal grants. These grant managers are responsible for ensuring all conditions agreed to before receiving the funds are honored with fidelity.
This is a slight detour from today’s topic yet is relevant in the context of the larger entity (federal government) exercising some ownership (taking agency) of the modest recipient (most of America’s roughly 18,500 law enforcement orgs) contractually bound by money provided from one to the other. Are abuses born of such dealings? Does the monetary richness of one bully the other?
Regarding federal oversight of any kind, encroachment seems evident and may have implicit/unspoken tenets such as holding-hostage federal dollars (grants) until certain criteria they set are met (consent decree).
“Consent” means to submit to, implying any police agency’s top brass wave on federal monitors associated with the DOJ and the U.S. Attorney General (confronting contempt of Congress charges lately, for which his underlings have zero inclination to prosecute).
I wonder about the DOJ and how it would work if subjected to a consent decree…
Lord knows how seemingly overzealous federal-level organizations have become lately, increasingly compelling citizens to wonder about constitutional rights being stepped on while the government grabs and gobbles more power.
In conclusion, the Louisiana State Police invested in novelly developed Troop NOLA for the long game, beyond a temporary fix, evidenced by a portion of its patrol fleet permanently plated for dedicated assignment to New Orleans geography:
“A distinctive feature of a fully marked LSP unit is the identifiable Louisiana license plate specific to each Trooper and their assigned work area. The new plates display ‘NOLA’ followed by the Trooper’s unit number. These milestones continue the progressive development of Troop NOLA operations and confirm LSP’s commitment to enhancing the safety and security of the residents and visitors of New Orleans.”
According to WWL Radio, “Louisiana State Police officials announced that members of the new permanent Troop NOLA have been deployed since January [2024].” Permanent!
On June 6, 2024, NOPD and the Office of the Independent Police Monitor hosted a “Consent Decree Hearing” that “focused on the latest audit revealing substantial progress in tackling bias in policing. This marks a significant step towards fairness, accountability, and building trust between law enforcement and our community.”
The consent decree imposed on NOPD was initiated in 2012; over a decade ago.
WDSU reporter Travers Mackel’s “Hot Seat” segment comprised a walk-and-talk with Deputy Police Superintendent Nick Gernon, discussing NOPD’s progress, hinting that an end to the consent decree monitoring seems near.
While NOPD officers are still subjected to the federal consent decree, state troopers are flipping the French Quarter and effecting paramount change in overall public safety.