The Lawless Lawmakers: Government's Illegal Undertakings

In a world where the government is expected to uphold the law, what happens when the government breaks the law? In the United States, the legislative, judicial, and executive branches of the government are all susceptible to rule-breaking. While the judiciary is tailor-made to play by the rules, even the highest courts sometimes face ambiguous situations. The executive branch, modelled after the president, often attempts to broaden executive power. The legislative branch frequently changes the rules that govern its operations. In some cases, government officials violate human rights and get away with it. They may kidnap, abduct, steal private property, seize evidence without a warrant, or imprison without charge. They may also lie, cheat, and coerce when gathering evidence of crimes. While there are laws in place to prevent such behaviour, charges and convictions of government officials are extremely rare.

Police brutality and misconduct

In the United States, marginalized groups often perceive the police as oppressors rather than protectors due to the disproportionate number of minority incarcerations. This perception is not unfounded, as studies have shown that people of color face a higher likelihood of being killed by police than white men and women. In addition, the US police have killed more people compared to any other industrialized democracy, with a disproportionate number of those shot being people of color.

The root causes of police brutality are multifaceted and complex. One significant factor is the insular culture of police departments, including the "blue wall of silence," where officers cover for each other and refuse to testify against one another. This code of silence is reinforced by union contracts, local regulations, and "law enforcement bills of rights" that protect officers from internal investigations. The aggressive defense of police officers by their unions and the broad legal protections granted to them, such as qualified immunity, also contribute to the problem.

Another factor is the historic racism of police departments. Since the 19th century, police brutality has often been directed at minority communities, including European immigrant groups, Jewish communities, and African Americans. This racism persists today, with a disproportionate number of people of color being targeted and killed by police. The adoption of tactics that escalate tension, such as zero-tolerance policing and stop-and-frisk, further contribute to police brutality and racial profiling.

Inadequacies in police training and the psychology of possessing police power are also factors. Police recruits are often trained in a paramilitary style, focusing on defensive tactics and killing rather than community interaction and outreach. This can foster a "warrior mentality," where officers view themselves as "warriors" fighting a "war" on crime, with certain people as their enemies. This mentality, combined with broad powers granted by the government and a lack of accountability, can lead to excessive use of force and abuse of power.

To combat police brutality, various solutions have been proposed, including the use of body-worn cameras, civilian review boards, improved police training, demilitarization of police forces, and legislation such as the Justice in Policing Act of 2020. Some advocates also call for defunding or abolishing the police, redirecting funds to community and social services instead. While there is no easy solution, addressing police brutality requires a multifaceted approach that addresses systemic issues within law enforcement and promotes accountability and transparency.

Lack of legal consequences for government officials

In the United States, there is a perception that government officials often face no legal consequences for breaking the law. This is especially true for police officers, prosecutors, and other government officials who violate people's rights. The case of George Floyd, where the responsible police officers were prosecuted, is a rare exception. More typical is the case of Breonna Taylor, where no homicide charges were brought against the officers involved in her killing.

Instances of law enforcement brutality rarely result in criminal charges, even when captured on video. This is due to a maze of obstacles to justice that individuals seeking legal redress must navigate. Charges and convictions of police officers are extremely rare, even in cases of homicide. Investigations into police misconduct are often toothless, and officers with a history of misconduct are rarely fired, let alone prosecuted and convicted.

The legal rules governing the use of force by police and civilians are different, leaving civilians with few good options for avoiding unlawful arrest or excessive force. Police officers are also protected by the "blue wall of silence", where officers provide each other with cover stories, retaliate against whistleblowers, and refuse to testify against one another.

Local prosecutors face internal pressure not to charge officers, as they rely on police officers as star witnesses. Prosecutors may also cover up police misconduct by unlawfully concealing evidence. The federal government has the authority to prosecute state and local law enforcement but rarely does so. Criminal charges against prosecutors themselves for violating people's rights are virtually non-existent.

The Civil Rights Act of 1871, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1983, allows anyone who uses their government position to violate a person's civil rights to be sued for damages. However, the Supreme Court has made it easier for law enforcement to avoid civil liability by claiming "good faith" or "probable cause". The doctrine of "qualified immunity" further protects government officials from being sued for violating people's rights.

In conclusion, while there are laws against police misconduct, the reality is that government officials often face no legal consequences for breaking the law, particularly when violating the rights of minority groups. This has led to a lack of trust in the justice system and calls for reform.

Violation of civil and human rights

While government officials and employees are generally prohibited from violating the civil rights of people they interact with, violations of civil and human rights by the government are not uncommon. These violations can take many forms, including excessive force, police misconduct, violations of prisoner rights, restrictions on free speech, and due process or equal protection violations.

One of the most prevalent civil rights complaints involves allegations of "color of law" violations, which occur when government officials abuse their power and violate the rights of citizens. This can include instances of police brutality, the use of excessive force, and even homicide, often targeting minority groups such as Black Americans and immigrants. In many cases, those responsible for these violations do not face criminal charges and are shielded from legal consequences.

The doctrine of qualified immunity further complicates efforts to hold government officials accountable. Qualified immunity allows officials to avoid liability if their actions did not violate a clearly established right, making it difficult for victims to seek justice. Additionally, the different legal rules governing the use of force by police and civilians create a disparity in how misconduct is addressed.

To address these issues, some have advocated for legislative changes, such as ending qualified immunity, creating a cause of action against federal officials who violate rights, and authorizing lawsuits against law enforcement agencies and municipal governments for employee misconduct. These proposed changes aim to increase accountability, ensure equal protection under the law, and prevent future violations of civil and human rights.

Abuse of power

In the United States, abuse of power has been cited in the impeachment of several federal officials, including President Richard Nixon and President Donald Trump. At the state level, Governor Rod Blagojevich of Illinois was impeached and removed from office by the Illinois Senate in 2009 for abuse of power.

Additionally, qualified immunity and absolute immunity doctrines further protect government officials from being sued for civil rights violations. The Supreme Court has also limited the ability to sue local governments for constitutional violations, making it challenging for individuals to seek justice and accountability.

To address these issues, it is crucial to strengthen democratic institutions, hold government leaders accountable, and create robust guardrails to prevent future abuses of power.

Unlawful imprisonment

Under United States law, police officers have the authority to detain individuals based on probable cause or reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. However, unlawful imprisonment by law enforcement authorities undermines the country's judicial system and violates individuals' rights. An example of this is the case of Enright v. Groves, where a woman was arrested for not producing her driver's license. She sued the police officer for false imprisonment and won her claim, as the court found that the officer did not have the proper legal authority to arrest her for that specific reason.

To prevail in a false imprisonment claim, a plaintiff must prove willful detention in a bounded area without consent or the authority of lawful arrest. The plaintiff's awareness of the confinement is also crucial. An area is considered bounded if freedom of movement is limited in all directions, and threatening to harm the detainee's family if they leave would also result in the area being bounded.

False imprisonment is punishable under criminal and tort law. Under tort law, it is classified as an intentional tort. In addition to criminal charges, victims of false imprisonment may seek civil remedies by suing the responsible parties for damages. However, qualified immunity and other legal doctrines often pose significant obstacles to holding government officials accountable.

Frequently asked questions