Phoenix Police Face Scrutiny as DOJ abandons Investigation into Alleged Abuses

PHOENIX – The Department of justice (DOJ) has retracted its findings of constitutional violations by the Phoenix Police Department, raising concerns among legal experts and advocates for the homeless.

In February 2020, a homeless man was allegedly grabbed and knelt on by an officer while another used a Taser on him after he questioned their authority. Other unhoused individuals reported officers discarding their belongings, with one officer allegedly stating, “You guys are trash and this is trash.” these incidents were part of a pattern of citations and arrests for actions “plainly not a crime,” according to the DOJ.

The DOJ’s investigation, initiated nearly three years prior, highlighted these alleged abuses, marking the first time the department had identified a pattern of violations against homeless individuals, including the illegal disposal of their possessions.

The investigation revealed that homeless individuals, accounting for less than 1% of the population, comprised 37% of all Phoenix Police Department arrests between 2016 and 2022. investigators deemed many of these stops,citations,and arrests unconstitutional.

The probe also uncovered instances of excessive force, discrimination against people of color, retaliation against protesters, and violations of the rights of individuals with behavioral health disabilities.

However, federal officials announced on Wednesday that they were abandoning efforts to compel the city and police to address these issues. The DOJ closed its investigations and retracted findings of constitutional violations in Phoenix and five other jurisdictions, citing concerns that consent decrees would lead to excessive federal oversight and costs.

DOJ Decision and City Response

The DOJ stated that requiring consent decrees would impose “years of micromanagement of local police departments by federal courts and expensive self-reliant monitors, and potentially hundreds of millions of dollars of compliance costs, without a legally or factually adequate basis for doing so.”

The city of phoenix responded with a statement affirming its commitment to “enhancing policy, training and accountability measures.” They cited policy changes, including employee training and the implementation of body-worn cameras, as steps taken in recent years.

Legal experts have expressed concern over the DOJ’s decision, emphasizing the need to address the uncovered wrongdoing, even without federal pressure.

Reactions and Potential Implications

Justin Levitt, a law professor at Loyola Marymount University and former deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division of the Department of justice, called the retraction “a very real shame and a disservice to the residents of these communities.”

Brook Hill, senior counsel with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil rights Under Law, suggested that the retraction, combined with a recent Supreme Court decision on homelessness, could embolden cities and police departments to marginalize homeless individuals further. “They will feel like they have a license to do the sweeps and to or else make life in public view uncomfortable for unhoused people,” he said.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently urged local governments to “use their authority affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court” to address encampments.

Background: phoenix’s Handling of Homelessness

Following the DOJ’s investigation in August 2021, the Fund for Empowerment and the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona filed a lawsuit against the city and police department, alleging “unconstitutional raids” on unsheltered individuals. The lawsuit accused the city of prioritizing encampment removals over providing housing.

A judge issued an injunction preventing the city from enforcing its camping ban against those without shelter and from seizing and discarding their belongings. The lawsuit remains ongoing.

The DOJ’s June 2024 report indicated that city officials continued to arrest people for camping and destroy belongings even after the injunction and new policies were implemented.

An investigation found that Phoenix rarely stored property seized from encampments. from May 2023 to 2024, the city responded to 4,900 reports involving encampments but stored belongings only 69 times.

In January 2024, the city issued its own report, disputing accusations that police “interfered with the possessions of people experiencing homelessness” and expressing unwillingness to be subjected to a consent decree.

Explainer: Consent Decrees and Police Reform

Consent decrees are court-approved agreements between the DOJ and local entities, often police departments, aimed at addressing systemic issues of misconduct or civil rights violations. These decrees typically involve independent monitors who oversee the implementation of reforms and ensure compliance with the agreement’s terms.

The DOJ’s decision to retract its findings and abandon consent decree efforts in Phoenix reflects a shift in approach, prioritizing local control and cost considerations over federal intervention.

Moving Forward

Attorneys and advocates emphasize that the DOJ’s decision does not effect private lawsuits alleging civil rights violations. The ACLU has launched a multi-state effort to file records requests to hold police departments accountable.

Elizabeth Venable, lead community organizer with the Fund for Empowerment, views the federal findings as a victory for unhoused people, irrespective of the retraction. “No matter what Pam Bondi says, people are not going to forget it, especially people who learned about something that they were horrified by,” she said.