Radley Balko, a journalist and author known for his work on police militarization and civil liberties, offers insights into Donald Trump’s controversial executive order on policing. He highlights the alarming shift towards federal control over local law enforcement and the potential for increased militarization. Balko warns about the threats to accountability and civil rights, emphasizing how these moves may be used against critics of the administration. The conversation delves into broader implications for the criminal justice system and the risks of an emerging police state.
Trump's executive order aims to increase federal control over local law enforcement, promoting militarization and reducing accountability for police misconduct.
The order seeks to undermine progressive prosecutors by politicizing law enforcement, creating fear among officials who advocate for reform and racial equity.
Deep dives
The Impact of Trump's Executive Order on Law Enforcement
Trump's executive order, titled 'Strengthening and Unleashing America's Law Enforcement to Pursue Criminals and Protect Innocent Citizens,' significantly seeks to bolster the power and unrestrained operations of law enforcement. It proposes allowing elite law firms that have financially supported Trump to defend police facing allegations of misconduct, thus counteracting traditional pro bono work aimed at supporting victims. Importantly, the order suggests a reduction or elimination of consent decrees that monitor police practices, which could lead to increased police brutality and abuse. Furthermore, the order promotes military involvement in police operations, indicating a shift towards a more militarized and aggressive approach to law enforcement.
Attacking Progressive Prosecutors
The executive order's implications extend beyond policing to a pointed attack on progressive prosecutors, who are now under a heightened scrutiny for their reform measures. Trump's administration is utilizing the Department of Justice to investigate prosecutors who prioritize racial equity in charging decisions, effectively punishing those who implement reforms that address systemic discrimination. This strategy not only undermines local electoral choices but also seeks to create an atmosphere of fear among progressive officials, pressuring them to abandon their reform agendas. Such actions highlight a broader systematic approach to politicizing law enforcement and discouraging meaningful change in the justice system.
The Rhetoric of Crime and Its Consequences
The messaging surrounding crime, particularly in Democratic-led cities, plays a crucial role in shaping public perception and policy decisions. Trump's narrative frames cities like San Francisco and New York as chaotic and lawless, despite statistics showing that crime rates have not significantly increased. This approach not only misleads the public but also stokes fear, which can drive support for repressive policing practices. The rhetoric of crime thus becomes a tool for political maneuvering, allowing the administration to justify harsher measures while ignoring the actual socioeconomic issues that contribute to crime.
Indemnification and Accountability in Policing
The discussion surrounding police indemnification reveals a troubling lack of accountability in law enforcement practices. Most damages awarded in police misconduct cases are covered by local or state entities, meaning officers rarely face personal consequences for their actions. Coupled with the concept of qualified immunity, which limits individuals' ability to sue police officers for violating rights, this creates an environment where law enforcement is not held adequately accountable for abuses. Such legal frameworks contribute to a culture of impunity, preventing meaningful redress for victims of police violence and misconduct.
Donald Trump’s all-caps executive order on policing — “STRENGTHENING AND UNLEASHING AMERICA’S LAW ENFORCEMENT TO PURSUE CRIMINALS AND PROTECT INNOCENT CITIZENS” – is less about policy and more about intent. And that intent is clear: To give Trump direct control over local law enforcement and further shield police from accountability.
As journalist and author of “Rise of the Warrior Cop” Radley Balko puts it, “It’s a statement of intent and whether or not Trump is able to do a lot of the more pernicious and unconstitutional things he wants to do.”
The executive order calls for “military and national security assets” to assist in local policing, directs federal resources and protections for state and local law enforcement, and enhances police protections, among other proclamations. But it reflects a deeper ambition.
“He wants more federal militarized law enforcement under his thumb instead of under the thumb of governors or mayors,” says Balko. “He wants to use them to help with immigration deportations. He wants help with cracking down on protest.” And the concern and fear, says Balko, is that Trump will also “use law enforcement to go after his critics and people he perceives to be his enemies.”
This week on The Intercept Briefing, Balko joins senior reporter Akela Lacy and host Jessica Washington to break down the Trump administration’s push to federalize local law enforcement and “unleash” police who already face minimal meaningful restraint.
Listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen.
