

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
In speaking with residents in several parts of Minneapolis, beautiful stories of organizing on a block-by-block level emerged as people mobilized to defend their neighbors from ICE.
Last week I was in Minneapolis, Minnesota to observe and learn from those who have attempted to protect members of their community from the brutal assaults by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other government agencies and hold those agencies accountable for the violence they are wrecking on the community.
The Trump administration’s decision to surge 2,000 ICE and Border Patrol agents into Minneapolis to uphold White House Deputy Chief of Staff Steven Miller’s directive for the arrest in the US of 3,000 persons each day to teach immigrants, and everyone in the US a lesson, backfired as the actions of the federal agents in Minneapolis outraged the city, state, and nation.
Due to community pressure and noncompliance with the violent attempts by ICE agents to force capitulation by the community and the lawlessness of the masked agents, caught on video by bystanders in busting doors to homes, smashing car windows, and beating up and murdering two Minneapolis residents eventually forced the Trump administration to replace the well-known, mean-spirited Gregory Bovino and bring in “border czar” Tom Homan who very quickly reduced the number of ICE agents in Minneapolis by one-third and required the agents to wear body cameras.

Community organizing began six years ago with the community response to the horrific murder of George Floyd. The protests and vigils for George Floyd in Minneapolis and around the world brought attention to the continuing targeting of African Americans for minor incidents that the police escalated into “I Can’t Breathe” and death.
To this day, each day for six years, a group from the community meets at 8:00 am at George Floyd Square located across the street from the Memorial over coffee to discuss the previous day’s events and the organizing needed for that day. There are several persons who are at the Square each day who can provide to a newcomer the historical context for the treatment by police of African Americans, Native Americans, and immigrants in the Minneapolis area.
Others arriving may be unhoused who are needing a cup of coffee and a doughnut for breakfast or some “new clothing” from the donations that are located inside a city bus stop shelter located at the square. By 9:30 am, the group has disbursed: some left quickly after 8:00 am to take kids to school or to go to work, others to continue work on community mutual aid projects.

In speaking with residents in several parts of Minneapolis, beautiful stories of organizing on a block-by-block level emerged! Residents got to know those who lived on the same block. Everyone had a whistle to alert the neighborhood that suspicious cars were in the area. Those residents who were not targeted by ICE, generally Caucasian, came out on the streets to find out what was happening and ready to record ICE actions. They began doing grocery shopping for those fearful of leaving their homes, taking kids to school, picking them up from school, and taking people to medical appointments.
The Minneapolis friend who housed us for this visit usually has at least two things per day that she was doing for immigrants in her neighborhood. Others in teams of two or three stand outside businesses that ICE might target, with the businesses thanking the volunteers by providing coffee and snacks.
Other volunteers in their personal cars follow vehicles that they suspect may be driven by ICE agents. Many of these volunteers have been physically assaulted by ICE agents who stop the volunteers, damage their cars, take their license plate numbers, find out the addresses of the volunteers, and then harass them at their homes.
Minnesota “Nice” has turned into “F**k ICE.”
The Veterans For Peace (VFP) chapter in Minneapolis has a Rapid Response team composed of veteran volunteers from around the country that has provided a presence in various parts of the city. In an article by VFP board member Gerry Condon, he relates: “Younger Post-9/11 veterans have taken the lead. They have been patrolling in at-risk neighborhoods, monitoring for agitators, deescalating situations at protests, and training people how to stop bleeding. At least four veterans have been arrested while peacefully protesting but have been released without charges.”
These types of community volunteering happen every day all over the city, including a team of carpenters who replace doors that ICE has knocked down when entering a residence, to a team of tow truck operators who return a vehicle that occupants have been kidnapped from to the residence of the person—free of charge.
Many of these stories, organizations, and actions are chronicled in the website: Stand With Minnesota.
Every day hundreds come to the Whipple immigrant court and detention building located in south Minneapolis. ICE agents mobilize in the huge parking lot with hundreds of rental cars and drive out to terrorize the community and bring those arrested into the Whipple facility before sending them to other detention locations.
Volunteers with megaphones speak their minds to the departing ICE agents with the most “F” words I have ever heard in all my life!!! Spontaneous “F**k ICE” chants erupt everywhere—from the entire audience in a recent Minneapolis hockey game to whenever Minneapolis residents meet on a street corner.
Minnesota “Nice” has turned into “F**k ICE.”
ICE put up tall fences on both sides of the roadway used for departure. In one remarkable action, community members threw dildos over the fences at ICE cars because they were such “dicks.”
Due to AI and facial recognition devices used by ICE, most who go to Whipple wear masks and leave their phones in their cars.
Another group of volunteers formed “Haven Watch” to provide 24-hour-a-day coverage for those who have been detained and subsequently allowed to leave Whipple. Generally, they are released from the detention facility at night, with no coats and sometimes no shoes, in the bitter cold with no phones to call for help. The volunteers provide warm drinks and food, clothing, a phone, and a ride home.

Hundreds of people visit the memorials each day of Renee Good and Alex Pretti. New flowers, photos, poems, and statements are placed at the site where each was murdered by ICE agents. We have all seen the videos of ICE agent Jonathan Ross shooting mother of three Renee Good in her car on January 7, 2026 and of Border Patrol agent Jesus Ochoa and Customs and Border Protection officer Raymundo Gutierrez murdering Veterans Affairs ICU nurse Alex Pretti on January 24, 2026 as five of them pinned Alex on the ground.
President Donald Trump, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and other administration officials' attempts to characterize both Good and Pretti as terrorists backfired badly as videos of the federal agents murdering them emerged.
The allegations against four others shot by federal immigration agents unraveled in court with little publicity.
Before Trump officials declared Renee Good and Alex Pretti at fault for instigating violence before they were killed, the administration’s allegations against four others shot at by federal immigration agents quietly unraveled in court. There have been 16 shootings by on-duty federal immigration agents patrolling in US cities and towns over the past year, including those that took the lives of Minnesota protesters Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

ICE violence is not the only type of violence in Minnesota. Saturday, February 14, 2026 we went to the Minneapolis American Indian Center to participate in the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Relatives Day of Remembrance, which is held each February 14, to bring awareness to the epidemic of Indigenous people who have gone missing or have been murdered.
Startling data collected by the state of Minnesota is evidence that Indigenous people are a high percentage of the state’s missing person cases.
The Minnesota state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension reports that 732 Indigenous persons went missing in Minnesota in 2025, more than 64% of whom were women. In 2025, the average number of Indigenous people in Minnesota who were missing on any one day was 63, according to the BCA.
According to 2024 data, American Indians accounted for more than 4% of all reported victims of homicide or nonnegligent manslaughter in Minnesota, despite American Indians making up only a little more than 1% of the population.

While ICE raids are the main focus of citizens of Minneapolis-St. Paul, they are still active in other issues. They have not forgotten Cuba and Palestine, among many issues, with weekly bridge bannering on Wednesday and Friday afternoons… after a day filled with protest of ICE!
Minnesota NICE—It Surely IS, Despite all the Challenges!
Renee Good deserved to live. Her death should not be explained away or absorbed into process language. It requires accountability.
I want to be clear about what happened in Minneapolis.
This was not an “ICE shooting.”
This was not a “law enforcement incident.”
This was the killing of Renee Good.
Renee Good was killed under a Trump administration that expanded ICE’s authority and encouraged aggressive enforcement nationwide.
Words matter. When we soften them, we make it easier to look away.
Renee Good was killed during an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operation in Minneapolis, not far from where George Floyd was murdered on May 25, 2020. Many people in this city recognize what happens after state violence occurs. We have seen how language is used to slow things down and move attention elsewhere.
As I write this, ICE activity continues across Minneapolis. American citizens were picked up and detained at a local Target. Less than two miles from where Renee Good was killed, ICE agents detained two staff members at Roosevelt High School in South Minneapolis, where I went to school. Shortly after, the school went into lockdown. The library across the street closed. Schools across the city were closed for the rest of the week.
These actions affect far more than the individuals detained. They interrupt schools, workplaces, and daily life. They place entire neighborhoods in a state of fear.
Wednesday night, we went to the vigil for Renee Good. We stood on ice and snow where she had been killed only hours earlier. People came quietly. Many did not know what to say. The weight of what had happened was still there.
The response from authorities has raised serious concerns. Federal agencies have taken control of the investigation and have not allowed the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, the Minneapolis Police Department, or the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office to conduct their own independent investigations.
We continue to urge state and local authorities to investigate and to document what happened in pursuit of the (T)ruth. The (T)ruth does not lie. We know what we saw, just as we knew what we saw on May 25, 2020. Communities do not forget what they experience firsthand.
At CAIR-Minnesota, we work with families who adjust their lives to avoid harm. Parents change routines. Workers stay silent about exploitation. Survivors hesitate before calling for help because they are unsure who will respond. This is the reality many people live with when ICE operates without accountability.
Renee Good was killed under a Trump administration that expanded ICE’s authority and encouraged aggressive enforcement nationwide. Across the country, ICE has been doing the unimaginable, often without transparency and with serious consequences for communities.
Renee Good deserved to live. Her death should not be explained away or absorbed into process language. It requires accountability.
We have been here before.
We know what unchecked power looks like.
We will overcome.
We will see to it. As God is our witness.
The author and NYU professor explains why America’s modern regime of policing and punishment is altogether extraordinary when measured against the practices of other developed nations.
The United States is a global outlier in several significant areas, not least of which is its extraordinary penal state with its penchant for extreme punitiveness.
Indeed, as Professor David Garland, one of the world’s most influential criminologists, argues in the interview that follows, for historical parallels with the penal state in the US one must look to the case of the Gulag system during Joseph Stalin’s reign as dictator of the Soviet Union. Moreover, Professor Garland contents that behind the harshness and cruelty of the US criminal legal system lies the nation’s racialized political economy, and that transforming the latter is a prerequisite for restructuring the former.
David Garland is the Arthur T. Vanderbilt professor of law and professor of sociology at New York University and an honorary professor at Edinburgh University. He is author of the newly published book Law and Order Leviathan: America’s Extraordinary Regime of Policing and Punishment.
C. J. Polychroniou: The United States has long portrayed itself as the greatest and freest country in the world, a model democracy for other countries across the globe. The reality, however, is that the US is the most economically unequal society in the developed world and one of the worst countries for racial equality. In addition, its weak and fragile liberal-democratic institutions have been exposed in recent times for all to see, while its penal system is what may easily be described as a national disgrace and an international embarrassment. Indeed, as you argue in your recently published book Law and Order Leviathan, the US is also an outlier among modern democracies in its policing and punishment practices, and this is indeed by no means a new phenomenon. How should we understand the country’s long-standing obsession with law and order?
David Garland: Yes, people think of America as Alexis de Tocqueville’s civil society when in fact it’s often closer to Thomas Hobbes’ authoritarian state. We see these repressive characteristics today in the conduct of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, but for the last 40 years the leading example has been the massive deployment of penal power by America’s criminal legal system—a deployment that has occurred at every level of government with broad bipartisan support.
The fundamental cause that has shaped America’s penal state is the nation’s racialized political economy and the material conditions created by its economic and political structures.
America’s modern regime of policing and punishment is altogether extraordinary when measured against the practices of other developed nations. American police kill civilians at a much higher rate; American courts impose longer and more frequent prison sentences; American prisons house massively more individuals, particularly Blacks and Latinos; and Americans with felony convictions are subject to many more controls and constraints after they serve their sentence. No other democracy exercises penal power to this extent. To find historical parallels, we have to look to the Soviet gulags or Mao’s political prison system.
There are many causes that converged to bring about America’s penal Leviathan—fear of crime, racism, neoliberalism, the appeal of law and order politics, a culture of cruelty and indifference—but the fundamental cause that has shaped America’s penal state is the nation’s racialized political economy and the material conditions created by its economic and political structures.
C. J. Polychroniou: The US has a weak welfare system and a distinct political economy in general compared to many European countries. Is there a direct link between weak welfare structures and the employment of aggressive policing and harsh punishment?
David Garland: Yes, and the book shows in detail what these linkages are and how they operate. Like its penal state, America’s political economy is an international outlier, with characteristics that set it apart from the economic arrangements of other high-income nations. This is especially true of its labor market—which provides fewer protections for working people, and more low-paid, precarious employment, making for a level of insecurity and instability that is unknown elsewhere in the developed world. On top of this, America’s welfare state provides less support for poor people and for those in need.
Material conditions for working people grew worse after the 1960s when the economic dislocations of deindustrialization were exacerbated by the collapse of the New Deal order, the decline of trade unions, and federal government’s abandonment of the inner cities. In the 1980s and 1990s, America exhibited social-problem levels markedly higher than other developed nations, the most striking of which was a rate of lethal violence—mostly gun homicides—that was off-the-charts high compared to other affluent countries.
The outlier status of America’s penal state will persist unless and until the nation’s political economy is transformed.
Drawing on urban studies and the sociology of violence, I show how pressures produced by America’s political economy—unemployment, disinvestment, deteriorating housing, limited social services, and so on—destabilize poor neighborhoods, undermining community life and family functioning, especially in racially segregated areas with concentrated poverty and population turnover. The result is that the vital processes of socialization, social integration, and informal social control normally carried out by families, schools, neighbors, and employers grow weak and fail, leading to social problems, social disorder, and criminal violence. These problems are deepened by the widespread availability of guns—another exceptional feature of the American landscape.
When homicides and armed robbery rates rose, and cities became disorderly and unsafe, voters demanded that something be done to improve public safety and protect their businesses and property values. But the same political economy that disorganized communities and triggered criminogenic processes also limited the governmental responses to these problems. In America’s racialized ultra-liberal political economy, redistributive policies are generally unpopular. And because responsibility for public safety is, in the US, a local function, few municipalities had the resources needed to respond to crime using the social policies and economic investments that are common in social democratic nations. Instead, they defaulted to the cheap policy instruments that were within their toolkit, namely police and punishment.
Moreover, American-style policing and punishment turns out to be remarkably aggressive. Why? Because of public indifference to the fate of those caught up in the carceral net; because the courts refuse to hold police and prisons to account; but mainly because penal state agents operate against a social background that is more disorganized, more dangerous, and more gun-laden than that of any other developed nation.
C. J. Polychroniou: As you point out in your book, public sentiments about police brutality, mass incarceration, and the penal state experienced a major shift away from punitive measures following the police murder of George Floyd on May 25, 2020. Indeed, as street protests ensued, the tenets of police and prison abolition gained currency, although alternatives still needed to be worked out. Be that as it may, the politics of law and order have since returned with a vengeance, as evidenced by the reelection of US President Donald Trump, who ran a campaign based on fear and anxiety. How do we explain this reversal?
David Garland: The plague year of 2020 was an extraordinary time, during which public anxiety and hopes for radical change often coexisted. (During the pandemic, the US created a pop-up European-style welfare state, with stimulus checks for every household; enhanced unemployment, housing, and child-allowance benefits; and massively extended healthcare coverage—only to dismantle it once the crisis had passed.) In retrospect, we can see that the massive street demonstrations that followed the police killing of George Floyd were possible because so many people were no longer at work or in school, making them available to join in the protests. Of course, many Americans were genuinely shocked by the brazen violence and racist disregard for human life that Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin displayed. But it is worth remembering, that by 2020, homicide levels and crime rates in general had been falling for more than a decade, relaxing public demands for tough-on-crime policies and enabling activists, such as the Black Lives Matter movement and local groups of abolitionists, to draw public attention to the pathologies of police violence, mass incarceration, and racialized criminal justice.
Democrats need to take the crime problem seriously and offer their own strategies and solutions—not just watered down versions of right-wing bromides.
In general, though, the American public is very conservative on matters of crime control and public safety, and demands for the “abolition” or “defunding” of police and prisons were never liable to have much traction beyond the world of activists, advocates, and academics—even when the liberal media briefly introduced these ideas into the mainstream. And while the life chances of middle-class white people are not normally affected by police violence or harsh prison sentences—in sharp contrast to poor communities of color—they are affected by crime and violence. So when, in the fall of 2020, there were reports of an uptick in shootings and homicides, public support drained away from Black Lives Matter and voters reverted to their long-standing preference for law-and-order candidates—as we saw in the election of Eric Adams to NYC Mayor, in the deselection of several progressive prosecutors, and eventually in the victory of Donald Trump. So the reversal was a political regression to the mean following an extraordinary historic moment.
However, I believe the protests of 2020, and the radical critique of the penal state that accompanied them, have changed the public discourse in important ways, introducing new ideas and radicalizing many young people who form part of the Democratic Party base. My hope is that this new level of concern about penal state repression will be joined with realistic, progressive proposals for dealing with crime and disorder. Democrats need to take the crime problem seriously and offer their own strategies and solutions—not just watered down versions of right-wing bromides. The emphasis should be on non-penal crime-control measures such as situational crime prevention; designing public spaces to make them safer; improving police training and effectiveness; relieving police of tasks for which they are not suited; enabling communities and not-for-profits to launch crime-reduction initiatives; supporting victims to reduce the likelihood of revictimization; and so on. Crime and disorder are real problems for working people; and the victims of homicide and assaults are most often poor and Black. Sustainable reform of the penal state must go hand in hand with effective crime control.
C. J. Polychroniou: What realistic possibilities are available to us for bringing about penal change if we do not first succeed in restructuring the political economy of the United States?
David Garland: To be clear, the outlier status of America’s penal state will persist unless and until the nation’s political economy is transformed. It is that peculiar political economy that makes American violence, policing, and punishment so extreme compared to other affluent nations. However, there is a range—I call it a “bandwidth”—of possible variation within which American crime, policing, and punishment can be changed: a structurally determined floor and ceiling between which lies the possibility of significant reform. That bandwidth of variation is a key part of the theoretical analysis set out in the book, and an empirical fact confirmed by recent developments.
Criminogenic processes and crime control policies are loosely coupled with political economy, not mechanically and directly determined by it. Crime-control policies can be altered, criminogenic processes interrupted, community work activated without any alternation in larger socioeconomic arrangements. For those hoping to bring about penal change, the existence of this relative autonomy is vitally important. It means that even if Nordic or Western European levels remain out of reach, there is nevertheless the real possibility of life-altering improvements in policing, punishment, and public safety.
There is a bandwidth of possibility within which variations in violence levels and penal state policies can occur even in the absence of larger structural change.
We know this because the last few decades have witnessed many instances of significant change. Over the last 20 years, the nation’s imprisonment rates declined from a high point of 765 per 100,000 to a new level closer to 600 per 100,000. Between 1995 and 2020 the nation’s annual homicide rate declined from around 10 murders for every 100,000 people to 5 per 100,000. Shootings of civilians by the New York Police Department (NYPD) dropped dramatically—from an average of 62 people shot and killed each year in the early 1970s to an average of nine per year between 2015 and 2021—after new forms of training, guidelines, and accountability were introduced. The NYPD also reduced its deployment of stop and frisk from over 680,000 per year in 2011 to 11,000 in 2018—the result of a court ruling not a social transformation. Between 1997 and 2023, 2 million formerly incarcerated people regained the right to vote, thanks to campaigns against felon disfranchisement. And since 2000, the imprisonment rate for Black men has fallen by almost half, thanks in large part to the scaling back the war on drugs.
Each of these changes was significant, even radical, affecting the lives of hundreds of thousands and sometimes millions of people. Together, they amount to an empirical demonstration of the book’s theoretical claim that there is a bandwidth of possibility within which variations in violence levels and penal state policies can occur even in the absence of larger structural change.
Nevertheless, the gravitational force exerted by structural arrangements—and the powerful interests that support them—is, in the final analysis, ineluctable. America’s political economy sets definite limits to what can be achieved and imposes upper bounds on what is possible. Until its structures are transformed, America’s penal state will continue to impose a level of punishment and control that has no equivalent in the developed world.
One critic called the move "an unprecedented abandonment of the Department of Justice's responsibility to enforce civil rights laws and protect communities from unlawful police abuse."
Racial justice advocates decried Wednesday's announcement by the U.S. Department of Justice that it will end law enforcement reform and accountability efforts, including the Biden administration's agreements with the cities of Minneapolis and Louisville—a move that came just days before the fifth anniversary of George Floyd's murder by a Minneapolis cop.
The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Civil Rights Division said it is dropping lawsuits against the Minneapolis and Louisville police departments and ending pending consent decrees—court-enforceable agreements under which law enforcement agencies commit to reform—with the two cities. The deals, which have been submitted to judges for approval, have been held up in federal court as the Trump administration has sought to block their implementation.
The Civil Rights Division said it "will also be closing its investigations into, and retracting the Biden administration's findings of constitutional violations on the part of," the Louisiana State Police and police departments in Phoenix; Memphis; Oklahoma City; Trenton, New Jersey; and Mount Vernon, New York.
To “disappear” DOJ findings like this is the most disturbing and disgraceful part. A key advantage of DOJ pattern & practice investigations is that DOJ has the resources to absorb the cost of generating the findings that indiv civ rights groups suing police depts find onerous & often prohibitive.
[image or embed]
— Sherrilyn Ifill ( @sifill.bsky.social) May 21, 2025 at 8:02 AM
Civil rights lawyer Benjamin Crump, who represents the families of George Floyd—murdered by then-Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin on May 25, 2020—and Breoanna Taylor, who was killed earlier that year by Louisville police, called the DOJ announcement a "slap in the face."
"Just days before the fifth anniversary of George Floyd's murder—a moment that galvanized a global movement for justice—the U.S. Department of Justice has chosen to turn its back on the very communities it pledged to protect," Crump said in a statement Wednesday.
"By walking away from consent decrees in Minneapolis and Louisville, and closing its investigation into the Memphis Police Department while retracting findings of serious constitutional violations, the DOJ is not just rolling back reform, it is attempting to erase truth and contradicting the very principles for which justice stands," he asserted.
"These consent decrees and investigations were not symbolic gestures, they were lifelines for communities crying out for change, rooted in years of organizing, suffering, and advocacy," Crump continued, adding that the DOJ's moves "will only deepen the divide between law enforcement and the people they are sworn to protect and serve."
Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) lamented the DOJ move and accused the Trump administration of acting "like Breonna Taylor and George Floyd's lives didn't mean a damn thing."
Democratic Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey said his city would proceed with reforms despite the DOJ's announcement, while questioning the move's timing.
"The Trump administration is a mess. It is predictable that they would move for a dismissal the very same week that George Floyd was murdered five years ago," he said. "What this shows is that all [President] Donald Trump really cares about is political theater."
The DOJ claimed the Biden administration falsely accused the Minneapolis and Louisville police departments of "widespread patterns of unconstitutional policing practices by wrongly equating statistical disparities with intentional discrimination and heavily relying on flawed methodologies and incomplete data."
"These sweeping consent decrees would have imposed years of micromanagement of local police departments by federal courts and expensive independent monitors, and potentially hundreds of millions of dollars of compliance costs, without a legally or factually adequate basis for doing so," the agency argued.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon—the conspiracy theorist who heads the Civil Rights Division despite, or perhaps because of, her troubled history of working against voting, reproductive, LGBTQ+, and other civil rights—said in a statement Wednesday that her agency is ending the Biden administration's "failed experiment of handcuffing local leaders and police departments with factually unjustified consent decrees."
"Overbroad police consent decrees divest local control of policing from communities where it belongs, turning that power over to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats, often with an anti-police agenda," Dhillon added.
"DOJ's actions today amount to a public declaration that law enforcement agencies are above the law."
Legal Defense Fund director of strategic initiatives Jin Hee Lee called the DOJ announcement "an unprecedented abandonment of the Department of Justice's responsibility to enforce civil rights laws and protect communities from unlawful police abuse."
Lee said the DOJ investigations that led to the consent decrees "revealed a litany of systemic harms to community members, whom officers are sworn to protect—from wanton violence and sexual misconduct to unlawful stops, searches, and arrests, and racially discriminatory policing."
"By abandoning its obligation to pursue legal remedies that would stem this unlawful conduct, DOJ necessarily condones it," Lee added. "DOJ's actions today amount to a public declaration that law enforcement agencies are above the law."
NAACP president Derrick Johnson said on social media, "It's no surprise that Trump's Department of Coverups and Vengeance isn't seeking justice."
"It's been five years, and police reform legislation still hasn't passed in Congress, and police departments still haven't been held accountable," Johnson added, referring to Floyd's murder. "Five years."
Furthermore, speculation is growing over the prospect of Trump pardoning Chauvin. Addressing the possibility, Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walzsaid earlier this week that "if Chauvin's federal conviction is pardoned, he will still have to serve the remainder of his 22-and-a-half-year state prison sentence for murder and manslaughter."
Opponents vowed to fight the Trump administration's civil rights pushback.
"Let me be clear: We will not give up," Crump said. "This movement will not be swayed or deterred by fickle politics. It is anchored in the irrefutable truth that Black lives matter, and that justice should not depend on who is in power."
"This video is sickening," the Illinois Legislative Black Caucus Senate chair said of the newly released body camera footage. "Justice demands answers and accountability."
Campaigners and political leaders across the United States responded with outrage and fresh calls for justice after the Monday release of body camera footage from the deadly police shooting of Sonya Massey, an unarmed 36-year-old Black woman from Springfield, Illinois.
"Sonya Massey, a beloved mother, friend, daughter, and young Black woman, should be alive today," U.S. President Joe Biden said in a statement. "Sonya's death at the hands of a responding officer reminds us that all too often Black Americans face fears for their safety in ways many of the rest of us do not."
"Sonya's family deserves justice," added Biden, who on Sunday exited this year's presidential race and endorsed his vice president, Kamala Harris, for the Democratic nomination. "Congress must pass the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act now. Our fundamental commitment to justice is at stake."
Massey called 911 just before 1:00 am CT on July 6 to report a "prowler" near her Springfield home,
according to WCIA and the Illinois State Police (ISP), which conducted an investigation after being contacted by Sangamon County Sheriff Jack Campbell.
Two deputies from the Sangamon County Sheriff's Office were dispatched in response to Massey's call. ISP posted a total of over 34 minutes of bodycam footage from both deputies on YouTube. The video shows a deputy shooting Massey, who had been holding a pot of water they asked her to take off the stove. Before releasing the footage, authorities blurred her body.
The bodycam footage can be viewed here on the ISP YouTube page.
Black Lives Matter Springfield warned in a Sunday statement that "the footage will be distressing. It will be infuriating, heartbreaking, and may trigger trauma responses. It may also spur hateful comments or actions online or elsewhere by those who do not share our outrage about this senseless murder."
The group encouraged the Black community "to take care of themselves during this time" and said that it "will continue to stand for justice through peaceful protest and community action for Sonya Massey and all the Black women and men who have been murdered by police before her."
Sangamon County State's Attorney John Milhiser announced last week that one deputy, 30-year-old Sean Grayson, was charged with three counts of first-degree murder, aggravated battery with a firearm, and official misconduct. Campbell said that Grayson has been fired and "our office will continue to cooperate fully with the criminal proceedings as this case moves forward."
Grayson, who is white, "has pleaded not guilty" and "is being held in the Sangamon County Jail without bond," The Associated Press reported. "If convicted, he faces prison sentences of 45 years to life for murder, six to 30 years for battery and two to five years for misconduct. His lawyer, Daniel Fultz, declined comment on Monday."
The other deputy who was on the scene has not been publicly identified.
During a Monday press conference, attorney Ben Crump said the bodycam footage would "shock the conscience of America like the pictures of Emmett Till after he was lynched" and Massey's father, James Wilburn, called for passing the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act—which includes various policies intended to reduce law enforcement misconduct and increase accountability.
Advocates have been sharing updates and expressing condolences on social media with the hashtag #StandWithSonya.
"Color of Change mourns Sonya Massey and we send our heartfelt condolences to the Massey family," said Kyle Bibby, the group's interim chief of campaigns and programs, in a Monday statement. "The video released today is gut-wrenching and once again shows that Black people in this country cannot escape police violence, even in their own homes. It is also a stark reminder of the urgent need to address police brutality and misconduct."
"The actions of Sean Grayson are disgraceful and inhumane, and reflect a blatant disregard for the safety and well-being of the community. His actions are an alarming reminder of how police so often disregard Black lives," Bibby continued. "It is crucial that the authorities take swift and decisive action in holding those responsible for Sonya Massey's death accountable, and work towards rebuilding trust and ensuring the safety and dignity of all individuals in our communities."
"Today, we weep for Sonya Massey and ask, How much more suffering is necessary before we see real change?" he added. "As we enter election season, our community members should ensure their voices are heard so they can demand reforms that increase police accountability and prevent violence like that perpetrated against Sonya Massey from ever happening again."
Since Grayson was charged, political leaders across the state have commented on the case. In a Wednesday statement that remains pinned to the top of Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker's profile on X, formerly Twitter, the Democrat welcomed the charges and called for building "a system of justice in this country that truly protects all of its citizens."
"My heart breaks for Sonya's children, for her family and friends, and for all who knew and loved her, and I am enraged that another innocent Black woman had her life taken from her at the hands of a police officer," Pritzker also said.
The comments kept mounting after the release of the video. U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said Monday that "the body camera footage released today is disturbing and unconscionable. My thoughts continue to be with Sonya Massey's children, family, and loved ones as they relive these horrible moments."
Some who weighed in highlighted aspects of Illinois state law, including bodycam requirements and rules for investigations.
"The body camera footage is horrific, and I offer my deepest sympathy to Sonya Massey's family as they relive a moment no family should experience," said Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul. "As the community reacts to the release of the footage, I urge calm as this matter works its way through the criminal justice system."
"In Illinois we have made sure that the law mandates independent investigations after officer-involved shootings," he added. "In this matter it appears that the investigation by the Illinois State Police and the subsequent referral to the Sangamon County state's attorney's office have complied with the letter and spirit of the law by providing the appropriate transparency and moving toward accountability."
State Sen. Robert Peters, Senate chair of the Illinois Legislative Black Caucus, said Monday that "this video is sickening. It is despicable and disgusting to see such brutal violence toward an innocent Black woman. How did this person ever become a law enforcement officer?"
"This is why we fought for increased transparency. This is why we fought for body camera requirements. This is why we fought to end cash bail to keep dangerous people detained," he continued. "But arresting and detaining the perpetrator isn't the end. Justice demands answers and accountability."
"The inadequacy of press freedom protections was starkly exposed during the Trump administration, when some of the largest street protests in American history took place," according to a new report.
In recent years, particularly since former Republican President Donald Trump took office in 2017, U.S. police have failed to uphold basic constitutional rights for journalists covering rallies and other protests, a new report from the Knight First Amendment Institute said Tuesday, with the study documenting a number of physical attacks, unjust arrests, and suppression tactics used by police at protests both large and small.
Senior visiting fellow Joel Simon interviewed dozens of journalists and legal experts about the resurgence of police violence against journalists in recent years—a trend that recalls numerous "notorious incidents" that took place during the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 60s, including the harassment of reporters attempting to cover school integration in Little Rock, Arkansas and the seizure of camera film from journalists in Greenwood, Mississippi as police dogs attacked protesters.
In the 1980s and 90s, Simon wrote in the report, "violent police attacks on journalists receded along with police-protester clashes, perhaps in part because many police departments adopted a more conciliatory, negotiation-based approach to demonstrators."
"The steady growth of police militarization post-9/11," however, "helped fuel further conflict with the press," Simon wrote.
In recent decades the Department of Defense has supplied police departments across the U.S. with "military-grade equipment like armored vehicles, rifles, and grenades," noted the author, and a PEN America report on the protests that erupted in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014 after the police killing of Michael Brown illustrated how that change in law enforcement agencies' arsenals has intensified police officers' treatment of journalists as well as protesters:
The actions against journalists, as well as those against protesters, were "fueled by the aggressive militarized response by police to largely peaceful public protests... This apparently created a mentality among some police officers that they were patrolling a war zone, rather than a predominantly peaceful protest attended by citizens exercising their First Amendment rights, and members of the press who also possess those rights." The number of reported abuses "strongly suggests that some police officers were deliberately trying to prevent the media from documenting the protests and the police response."
In Ferguson, Simon wrote, researchers documented 52 alleged violations of reporters' constitutional right to cover protests, including physical attacks and aggression, obstruction of access, and 21 arrests.
"Protests have always been dangerous to cover, but we had never seen anything on this scale."
The protests in Ferguson marked a milestone in law enforcement's changing relationship with the press, the report shows, followed six years later by a number of rights violations during the nationwide racial justice uprising of 2020 in response to the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis.
"The inadequacy of press freedom protections was starkly exposed during the Trump administration, when some of the largest street protests in American history took place, including those against the Floyd murder," wrote Simon. "During that period, police frequently assaulted, arrested, or detained journalists at protests, particularly when enforcing dispersal orders, imposing curfews, or deploying crowd control measures. In 2020, at least 129 journalists were arrested covering social justice protests. More than 400 journalists suffered physical attacks, 80% of them at the hands of law enforcement."
Photojournalist Mike Shum described to Simon how "law enforcement turned on the media" in Minneapolis four days after Floyd's murder, after Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) imposed an 8:00 pm curfew that ostensibly exempted the press:
That night police fired on a group of journalists with rubber bullets, hitting Shum in the foot. "It was confusing because we just kept screaming 'we’re press, we're press,’ but the bullets just kept flying," Shum recalled. In a separate incident that day, police in Minnesota fired on photojournalist Linda Tirado with what is believed to be a rubber bullet, permanently blinding her in one eye.
Other journalists were "pelted with pepper spray, tear gas, and other projectiles as they ran to take cover" after police "formed a skirmish line" to enforce the curfew. A photographer working with NBC, Ed Ou, was "hit in the head with what he believes was a flash-bang grenade" and then "blasted" with pepper spray by police who ignored his pleas for medical assistance.
Outside the Twin Cities, other journalists covering the uprising were hit with batons, beaten, and shot with rubber bullets, as well as arrested for trying to report on the protests.
The U.S. Press Freedom Tracker—whose data Simon used to compile the report—found that "hundreds of separate incidents" of police violence against journalists took place in 80 cities across 36 states in the year following Floyd's murder. Journalists in 309 cases said they were targeted by police officers between May 26, 2020—the day after the killing—and May 26, 2021, and 44 of those cases took place in Minneapolis.
"Protests have always been dangerous to cover, but we had never seen anything on this scale," Kirstin McCudden, managing editor of the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, told Simon.
The report also details the use of "kettling"—in which police contain protesters, and in some cases, journalists, by surrounding them in one area—which was prevalent during the demonstrations that erupted in Washington, D.C. during Trump's inauguration in 2017.
One journalist, Aaron Cantú, was reporting on the "DisruptJ20" rally when he was trapped by the police officers' kettling tactic.
"He assumed he could approach the police line and explain he was reporting on the rally," Simon wrote. "But when he initially tried to engage with police, he was hit with pepper spray in his eyes and temporarily blinded."
Police also applied zip ties to Cantú's wrists "so tightly that his hands went numb" and refused him access to food or a bathroom "during the more than eight hours he was held in the kettle." Law enforcement also demanded access to his phone and electronic communications.
"The nature of journalism has changed, and the law does not appear to have kept up," Cantú told Simon. "In these dangerous situations, law enforcement is deciding who is or who is not a journalist."
Cantú was one of more than 200 protesters and journalists who were arrested at the protest, none of whom were ultimately convicted of a crime.
"These events could have played out differently. Police could have opted not to use kettling, an indiscriminate tactic that detains everyone in a geographical area, instead attempting to single out for arrest those who were violating the law," wrote Simon. "Police might have made a greater effort to ascertain if journalists were accidentally caught up in the kettle and to release them if their role could be confirmed. Prosecutors could have made a decision not to charge them, based on the fact that they were acting as journalists and engaged in newsgathering activities."
In the report, Simon called on police to refrain from interfering with or using force against anyone engaged in newsgathering activity and exempt reporters from curfew and dispersal orders.
"When the general public is no longer permitted to remain at the site of a protest, police can use indicators like a press credential, distinctive clothing marked 'press,' or professional recording equipment, to guide their determinations about who is exempt from the order," he wrote. "When in doubt, police should assume that someone who appears to be engaged in journalism is in fact a journalist."
Other recommendations include:
Three years after the George Floyd protests, and ahead of the 2024 election, Simon wrote, "America remains polarized and broader policing issues are a source of deep controversy."
"This is the moment to tackle the historic challenge," he added. "The next wave of mass protests could be just around the corner. So could America's next press freedom crisis."
"Reform isn't what we need! 'Reform' means more money for the killer cop industry that will never erase its origins out of slave patrols," asserted Black Lives Matter.
Racial justice defenders on Friday said the Department of Justice probe of the Minneapolis Police Department—which detailed a pattern of excessive violence, racism, and civil rights violations—underscores the need for deep systemic transformation of U.S. policing.
The DOJ's 89-page
report—the result of an investigation launched in the wake of the May 2020 murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin—found that, as many community members have said for decades, the MPD and Minnesota's largest city "engage in a pattern or practice of conduct in violation of the U.S. Constitution and federal law."
"Our investigation showed that MPD officers routinely use excessive force, often when no force is necessary. We found that MPD officers often use unreasonable force (including deadly force) to obtain immediate compliance with orders, often forgoing meaningful de-escalation tactics and instead using force to subdue people," the report states. "MPD's pattern or practice of using excessive force violates the law."
The DOJ probe found that MPD:
"We also found persistent deficiencies in MPD's accountability systems, training, supervision, and officer wellness programs, which contribute to the violations of the Constitution and federal law," the report states.
Responding to the investigation, Black Lives Matter tweeted: "Reform isn't what we need! 'Reform' means more money for the killer cop industry that will never erase its origins out of slave patrols. Defund the police. Then we abolish."
Award-winning filmmaker and Twin Cities community artist D.A. Bullock lamented "the absolute folly of dedicating all our resources toward carceral systems that do not work."
"[You] don't fund or bolster the executioner to prevent the murder," he argued on Twitter.
John Thompson, a former Democratic Minnesota state lawmaker from St. Paul, said at a community press conference after the report's release that "we've been here before. Everything they've told you... we've said it before out of our own mouths, only to be ridiculed and called race-baiters."
"I can only speak as a Black man, because I've been a Black man my whole life. Black men died at the hands of the Minneapolis Police Department... We're talking about Black men dying," added Thompson, who was friends with Philado Castile, a Black man shot dead in his car in 2017 by an officer in the Minneapolis suburb of Falcon Heights.
"We steady keep pumping money into public safety but the public is not safe," he contended.
The DOJ probe found that between 2020 and 2022 MPD officers stopped Black people at 7.8 times the rate of white people, and Indigenous people 10 times as often as whites, with the disparity in searches even worse.
"MPD searches people during stops involving Black people at 12.8 times the per capita rate at which it searches people during stops involving white people. MPD searches people during stops involving Native Americans at 19.7 times the rate for white people," the report notes.
Furthermore, the report highlights a pattern of "needlessly harsh treatment of youth," including an incident in which "an MPD officer drew his gun and arrested an unarmed Black teen for allegedly taking a $5 burrito without paying," pinning the child to the hood of a car and prompting witnessed to call 911 "to report the teen was being accosted by a 'wacko who has a gun.'"
A section of the DOJ report on MPD's illegal attacks on protesters and journalists states:
MPD officers regularly retaliate against members of the press—particularly by using force. For example... on May 30, 2020, officers encountered journalists who were sheltering at a gas station. An officer... approached a journalist who was filming, holding up his press credential, and shouting, "I'm press!" The officer forcefully pushed the journalist's head to the pavement. As he lay on the ground, the journalist held up his press credential. In response, an MPD sergeant pepper sprayed him directly in his face, then walked away.
The DOJ said Minneapolis and the MPD have agreed "in principle" to a consent decree, a plan for reform enforced by a federal court.
"George Floyd's death had an irrevocable impact on his family, on the Minneapolis community, on our country, and on the world," U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement. "The patterns and practices of conduct the Justice Department observed during our investigation are deeply disturbing. They erode the community's trust in law enforcement. And they made what happened to George Floyd possible."
"Today, we have completed our investigation, but this is only the first step," Garland added. "We will continue to work with the city and the MPD toward ensuring that MPD officers have the support and resources they need to do their jobs effectively and lawfully as we work together toward meaningful and durable reform."
The report contains 28 recommendations in eight categories: use of force, identifying and reducing racial disparities, protecting First Amendment rights, responding to people with behavioral health issues, accountability, transparency, training, and wellness.
The ACLU of Minnesota—which has filed three lawsuits over the unconstitutional MPD practices referenced in the DOJ report—said it hopes the city will agree to include all of DOJ's recommendations in the forthcoming consent decree.
"The findings of the DOJ's investigation into the Minneapolis Police Department are troubling, and sadly not surprising," ACLU of Minnesota executive director Deepinder Mayell said in a statement. "Minneapolis residents—especially Black and Indigenous people, and people with behavioral health disabilities—have long been victim to excessive force and discriminatory treatment at the hands of MPD."
"Police have treated the people and the First Amendment with blatant disrespect by assaulting protesters and journalists," Mayell added. "We hope the coming consent decree finally helps create a community where all people are safe, and police follow the law."
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said in a statement that "this is a dark day for our city."
“These findings are shocking, but sadly, not surprising," Omar continued. "What's worse, the report finds that many of the violations—such as the widespread failure to report race and gender in stops— increased after George Floyd's murder in 2020."
"As a Black woman living in Minneapolis, I have experienced some of these violations firsthand," she said.
"What's worse, the report finds that many of the violations—such as the widespread failure to report race and gender in stops— increased after George Floyd's murder in 2020."
Omar argued that "we must demand a public safety system built on data and trust, not fear and racism. We must recognize that we cannot prosecute and incarcerate our way to sustainable public safety, that building that trust requires that we address the system that allows racial discrimination—from the disproportionate arrest and incarceration rates Black and Brown people face, to the marijuana laws that criminalize Black and Brown people."
"We need to act at the federal level, including by passing my Amir Locke End Deadly No Knock Warrants Act, my package of bills making police violence against protesters a federal crime (among other provisions), and the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act," the congresswoman added. "And most of all, we must build a police force that is well-trained, held accountable by its leadership, and follows the highest standards of ethics and conduct."
In response to the DOJ report, Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O'Hara
vowed that "we will change the narrative around policing in this city. Out of the darkness and trauma that our residents and our police officers have experienced over the last three years, we will emerge as a beacon of light for the rest of the world."
Civil rights attorneys Benjamin Crump, Antonio Romanucci, and Jeff Storms—members of George Floyd's legal team who now represent relatives of Amir Locke, a Black man shot dead by MPD officers executing a February 2022 "no-knock" warrant for another man—released a statement that said in part:
Unfortunately, our legal team remains skeptical about Minneapolis' commitment to change and accountability. We are deeply concerned that while city leaders appear to be cooperating with the DOJ directives to create change, the city is doing the opposite, and vigorously defending the conduct of the officers who shot and killed Amir Locke.
"Despite the city's public face of wanting reform to stop the needless deaths of young Brown and Black Minneapolis residents, the city continues to mount aggressive defenses on behalf of the officers and police department they agree requires federal consent reforms," the trio added. "This continued refusal to police from within is a textbook example of why the federal government must police the Minneapolis police."
Instead of sharing video after someone is killed by police, it’s time to prioritize preventative measures.
When Black street performer Jordan Neely was murdered on a New York subway, four minutes of video by a freelance journalist captured the event, prompting last week’s protests and a nationwide outcry. This is part of an ongoing flood of video documenting violence against Black bodies.
This month alone, body cam video showed Alabama police sending a police dog after an unarmed Black man and Minnesota officers mistakenly attacking a 65-year-old Black man using a walker (after the video had been suppressed for three years). Also, San Francisco supervisors unanimously passed a resolution demanding the release of video footage of the killing of Banko Brown, a 24-year-old Black transgender man killed in late April.
Thanks to technology, cameras are now ubiquitous tools that save lives and hold the perpetrators of state-sanctioned violence accountable, but I see a sinister effect in motion as well. It’s no coincidence that when the video of Tyre Nichols’ murder was released in January, my Facebook timeline included trigger warnings. These images stay with us, and have an insidious impact. Who can forget the haunting footage of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin murdering George Floyd on the sidewalk in plain sight in May 2020?
When these murders do occur, society should be more mindful about sharing the resulting footage and shaping the public narrative.
The frequency of publicized police violence on social media, television, and in print is desensitizing us to violent acts against Black bodies, fueling an obsession with Black trauma porn. The infatuation with Black trauma porn has real consequences for real people. It can lead to further deaths by police as their workforce becomes more desensitized to unpenalized and incentivized violence.
Instead of sharing video after someone is killed by police, it’s time to prioritize preventative measures.
First, alternatives to calling 911 should be made more widely available. Mental health crises or Black BBQ-ers are not situations that require police to respond. When they do, this can lead to unnecessarily hostile contact with police and unintended deaths.
Additionally, the police force should come from or look like the communities they represent. To be sure, racial and ethnic commonalities did not protect Mr. Nichols at all. However, the foundation of Memphis law enforcement is rooted in anti-Blackness that affects Black officers too.
Statistically, White men are less than one-third of the U.S. population but represent two-thirds of the police force. Yet, countless studies show that diverse workforces are safer. For instance, economist Bocar Ba and colleagues found that Black officers made 15.16 fewer stops and 1.93 fewer arrests than their White counterparts over 100 shifts. This behavior resulted in a 32% reduction in use of force among Black officers compared to White officers. Less force leads to fewer deaths.
There should also be a SWOT analysis (a type of program assessment that identifies strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) for existing implicit bias training for police officers, as little research exists proving its efficacy. A study of the NYPD by criminal justice professor Robert Worden and colleagues shows that while implicit bias training does impact attitude, it doesn’t always change behavior. Implicit bias training for their department showed no significant reduction in the frisks in stops, summonses, and arrests involving Black and Hispanic people after police were trained.
Lastly, there needs to be frequent and equitable internal and external review of any police misconduct allegations. Police officers are supposed to serve and protect the public and should be held to the highest scrutiny when they unnecessarily kill citizens instead.
When these murders do occur, society should be more mindful about sharing the resulting footage and shaping the public narrative. The Black community suffers from the harmful tropes resulting from narratives that are not our own. The public witnesses these narratives and internalizes harmful tropes that lead to us being even more discriminated against and stereotyped.
Headlines depicting White mass murders read more like their dating app profiles than a description of their gruesome crimes. Meanwhile, Black perpetrators of petty crimes are shown by their mugshot. This has to stop.
Sending thoughts and prayers to mourning families on the receiving end of society’s obsession with Black trauma porn is not enough—and it’s not fair. Implementing policies and practices that create an anti-discriminatory system with accessible 911 alternatives is the most effective and genuine response.
The death rate of marginalized peoples at the hands of police is a public health crisis. In the last 12 months, police have killed over 1,100 people, with a disproportionate number of deaths being Black or Brown people.
Police departments, judicial systems, and infrastructure are all needed to fight this ugly reality and uphold the responsibility to build a diverse, well-trained police force that doesn’t contribute so heavily to Black trauma porn and holds its members accountable.
"The FBI's systematic misuse of these resources proves that it (and the rest of the federal government) simply can't be trusted to wield this sort of power," said one campaigner. "Let 702 die."
Friday's "alarming" revelations about U.S. law enforcement's abuse of a powerful surveillance tool "confirmed the worst fears of advocates" and likely further complicated a brewing battle in Congress over reauthorizing a constitutionally dubious spying law.
Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)—which is set to expire at the end of this year unless reauthorized by federal lawmakers—empowers the U.S. government to engage in warrantless surveillance of electronic communications. Although the law only authorizes targeting foreigners located outside the United States to acquire foreign intelligence information, a massive amount of Americans' data is also collected.
On Friday, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), in consultation with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), released a pair of redacted Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) opinions—one which revealed that in 2020 and early 2021, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) misused the Section 702 database over 278,000 times.
"These unlawful searches undermine our core constitutional rights and threaten the bedrock of our democracy. It's clear the FBI can't be left to police itself."
The "persistent and widespread" violations by the FBI—which is part of the DOJ—include searches for information related to crime victims, protesters arrested after the 2020 police killing of George Floyd, donors to a congressional candidate, and people suspected of breaching the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
The New York Times reported that "a senior FBI official said that in those cases, the analysts misunderstood the standard and were required to undergo additional training," and a representative for the DOJ disclosed that the unidentified political candidate lost to an incumbent lawmaker.
The ODNI's statement about the court documents insists that "all of these compliance incidents occurred prior to FBI deploying a series of remedial measures beginning in the summer of 2021 and through 2022. As a result, these compliance incidents do not reflect FBI's querying practices subsequent to the full deployment of the remedial measures."
However, exposure of the FBI's conduct prompted fresh demands from civil liberties advocates in Congress and beyond for seriously reforming or even ending Section 702, with several critics casting doubt on claims that the bureau—and other agencies with access to the collected data—will behave absent outside intervention.
"These abuses have been going on for years and despite recent changes in FBI practices, these systematic violations of Americans' privacy require congressional action," U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) declared Friday. "If Section 702 is to be reauthorized, there must be statutory reforms to ensure that the checks and balances are in place to put an end to these abuses."
"I am disappointed at the extent of the redactions in the opinions released today," he added, pledging to pressure ODNI to inform the public about the interpretation of the law behind closed doors. "There is important, secret information about how the government has interpreted Section 702 that Congress and the American people need to see before the law is renewed."
House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) also weighed in, though he noted his hesitation to do so given that Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) has created the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government—which has been called the "Insurrection Protection Committee" and a "fascist power grab to evade accountability" by progressive lawmakers:
In the middle of Chairman Jordan's overzealous attack on federal law enforcement and the absurd claims advanced by the MAGA crowd on the weaponization subcommittee, I am hesitant to comment at all—but the abuse of FISA authority detailed in this opinion demands a response from all members of Congress. Section 702 exists only to protect the country from external threats to our national security. The government may only use it to target non-U.S. persons located outside of the United States. If the FBI insists on using it for routine domestic criminal investigations, without a warrant or probable cause, then perhaps they should not have access to this information at all. The problem is not that the FBI unlawfully targeted thousands of Americans of any particular political view. They appear to have conducted backdoor searches on Black Lives Matter protestors, January 6th rioters, and everyone in between. The problem is that they unlawfully targeted thousands of Americans. Period.
The FBI says that they have instituted new procedures to make this kind of abuse impossible. They have made that promise before. Without significant changes to the law to prevent this abuse, I will oppose the reauthorization of this authority.
Civil society groups that have for years sounded the alarm about Section 702 responded similarly to the latest revelations.
"Today's disclosures underscore the need for Congress to rein in the FBI's egregious abuses of this law, including warrantless searches using the names of people who donated to a congressional candidate," Patrick Toomey, deputy director of the ACLU's National Security Project, told The Associated Press Friday. "These unlawful searches undermine our core constitutional rights and threaten the bedrock of our democracy. It's clear the FBI can't be left to police itself."
The Washington Post noted that "this is not the only time the FBI has been in trouble for the database. Another recent audit found multiple problems, including that the FBI used the database to search for the name of a member of Congress."
"For the FBI to misuse Section 702 to spy on people protesting the killing of George Floyd, political donors, and victims of crimes is an unspeakable abuse of trust," said Demand Progress senior policy counsel Sean Vitka. "Congress must enact comprehensive privacy protections for people in the United States, against all forms of warrantless surveillance, or Section 702 must fall. If the administration wants to see this law survive in any form, it should publicly embrace this reality."
The Biden administration in recent months has urged Congress to reauthorize Section 702, including in a February letter to top Democratic and Republican lawmakers from Attorney General Merrick Garland and Avril Haines, director of national intelligence.
Vitka asserted that the "shocking" abuse is "unmatched since the days of J. Edgar Hoover," a former longtime FBI director also referenced by Jake Laperruque, deputy director of the Center for Democracy & Technology's Security & Surveillance Project.
"Even with the long history of FBI misuse of FISA 702, these latest revelations should set off alarm bells across Congress," said Laperruque. "The systemic misuse of this warrantless surveillance tool has made FISA 702 as toxic as COINTELPRO and the FBI abuses of the Hoover years. Absent a full overhaul of Section 702 and related surveillance powers, Congress should not allow the law to be extended past this year."
"For decades, we've seen surveillance abuse target political dissidents and marginalized communities, and worried a defensive search exception for FISA 702 could be misused the same way," he added, referring to queries seeking data on someone who may be a victim or target of a foreign influence operation. "This shocking example of 'defensive searches' being an excuse to pull up the communications of a batch of 19,000 political donors without a warrant should end the discussion of whether any type of 'defensive search' exception is safe or acceptable.”
Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of Brennan Center for Justice's Liberty and National Security Program, said in a series of tweets Friday that "it's time to end this charade once and for all. The Fourth Amendment requires the government to show probable cause to a court if it wants to access Americans' communications."
"Backdoor searches provide an end-run around this requirement under the best of circumstances and they are indefensible when the [government] is violating its own minimal standards in ways that directly impact Americans' rights to engage in political protest, donate to political campaigns, or just live their lives free from [government] scrutiny based on race or ethnicity," she added. "Congress should not authorize Section 702 without sweeping reforms, starting with a warrant requirement to conduct U.S. person queries of any data the government obtained without a warrant based on the claim that it was not targeting Americans."
In a Friday opinion piece for Fast Company, Albert Fox Cahn, founder and executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, argued that the data collected under Section 702 "is nothing short of a loaded gun aimed at the heart of a democracy, a lawless digital dragnet systematically abused by those who swore to uphold the law."
The campaigner continued:
As civil rights groups warned would happen, FBI agents just couldn't help themselves. Rather than follow the limits that were supposed to protect Americans from this international dragnet, agents used this terrifying tool to target protesters and domestic suspects. And the abuses should be chilling to all of us, no matter where we sit on the political spectrum...
It would have been disturbing if these sorts of egregious examples happened just a few times, but to see the FBI's systematic misuse of these resources proves that it (and the rest of the federal government) simply can't be trusted to wield this sort of power.
"If the FBI is willing to break the law this brazenly, Congress and the administration must acknowledge that there's no set of guardrails, no Band-Aid, that can fix 702 and keep the public safe," he concluded. "The only way to safeguard our data and our rights is to do what we should have done a long time ago: Let 702 die."
FAIR studies of New York Times coverage from George Floyd to Tyre Nichols.
Since the brutal police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis in 2020, and the Black Lives Matter protests that spread across the country, how have news media covered issues of policing policy and police reform?
To offer perspective on this question, FAIR looked at which kinds of sources have been most prominent in the New York Times‘ coverage of these issues, and therefore are given the most power to shape the narrative. We compared three time periods: June 2020, when the BLM protests were at their height; May–June 2022, leading up to and encompassing the two-year anniversary of those protests; and mid-January to mid-February 2023, when the police killing of Tyre Nichols was prominent in news coverage and reignited conversations around police reform.
We found that, overall, the Times leaned most heavily on official (government and law enforcement) sources when reporting on the issue of policing policy—giving the biggest platform to the targets of reform, rather than the people who would most benefit from it. We also found a prominent stress on party politics and a lack of racial and gender diversity among sources.
However, we also found that the Times‘ 2023 Tyre Nichols coverage offered a wider diversity of sources, and a greater percentage of Black sources, than in the previous time periods. This appeared to result in part from many of the articles focusing on deeper reporting on the local situation in Memphis, a majority-Black city (unlike, for instance, Minneapolis, where George Floyd was killed).
In contrast, the 2022 articles focused more on policing and crime as an election topic at a national level. The 2020 articles covered the broadest range of issues and geography, but with particular attention to the protests, and the federal and local legislative responses.
The most recent coverage had more voices critical of policing policy and practices than in the previous study periods—though, at the same time, those voices came less from protests on the streets and more from advocacy groups, lawyers, academics, religious leaders and general public sources, and so shifted from the raw anger and “defund the police” demands of 2020 to less radical accountability measures.
Eliminating passing mentions and opinion pieces, we examined New York Times news articles centrally about policing policy or reform. We found 10 articles (with 58 sources) meeting our criteria between May 1 and June 30, 2022, and 16 articles (111 sources) between January 13 and February 10, 2023 (two weeks before and after the main day of the Tyre Nichols protests). Because the Times covered the issue so extensively in 2020, we took a random sample of 25 articles (142 sources) meeting our criteria from June 2020.
Sources were coded for occupation, gender, race/ethnicity and party affiliation (for government officials and politicians). Each source could receive more than one code for occupation (e.g., academic and former law enforcement) and race/ethnicity (e.g., Black and Asian American).
The movement to protest racist policing has been led primarily by Black activists, many of them women. It is a movement fundamentally about race, racism and white supremacy. Yet white sources handily outnumbered Black sources in coverage of police reform in two of the three periods studied, and men outnumbered women by roughly three-to-one in all three.
Of sources whose race could be identified, 52% were white and 40% Black in the 2020 data. In the 2022 data, white sources decreased slightly, but dominated Black sources by an even greater margin: 48% to 30%.
In the 2023 data, that trend reversed, and Black sources reached 66%, while white sources dropped to 31%.
One thing that didn’t change across the time periods was the New York Times‘ reliance on male sources: Men were 72% of sources with an identifiable gender in 2020, 74% in 2022 and 76% in 2023.
Policing is not a strictly Black-and-white issue, of course, and the coverage played out against the backdrop of rising xenophobia and anti-Asian hate resulting from the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, with many using rising bias crimes against people perceived as Asian as an excuse to increase policing. Yet such voices were largely excluded from the conversation at the Times.
In 2020, 6% of sources were Hispanic and 2% were Indigenous; 1% were Asian-American and none were of Middle Eastern descent. In 2022, Times sources expanded a bit from the racial binary, with 14% Hispanic sources and 10% Asian-American. (No Indigenous sources or sources of Middle Eastern descent were quoted in 2022.) In 2023, that diversity disappeared, and of the 99 sources with identifiable race/ethnicity, only 2% were of Asian descent and 1% were Hispanic; none were of Indigenous or Middle Eastern descent.
The bias toward white and male sources—and the decrease in white sources in 2023—can be explained partly by the New York Times‘ bias toward government and law enforcement sources, both of which are disproportionately white, male fields.
In June 2020, a majority of all sources (55%) were current or former government officials—not including law enforcement, which formed the second-largest share of sources quoted, at 17%. Two years later, government sources had dropped to 40%, while law enforcement stayed roughly the same, at 16%; politicians running for office increased from less than 1% of 2020 sources to 5% of 2022 sources. In 2023, government sources dropped yet again, to only 22% of sources, and law enforcement remained steady at 16%.
Meanwhile, activists (protesters or organizers) accounted for 10% of 2020 sources, and representatives of professional advocacy groups accounted for 11%. In 2022, when street protests were relatively much smaller compared to 2020, activist voices were missing entirely, and professional advocate sources—such as the president of the NAACP and the director of Smart Justice California—increased to 21%. In 2023, the total across these two groups increased, with advocates accounting for 21% of sources and activists for 9%, and a greater number of non-governmental sources such as lawyers, academics and religious leaders appeared than in the previous time periods.
Combined, more than 7 in 10 of all sources quoted in 2020, more than 5 in 10 in 2022, and nearly 4 in 10 in 2023 were the government and law enforcement officials the protests sought to hold accountable. Only about 2 in 10 in 2020 and 2022, and 3 in 10 in 2023, were civil society members protesting or advocating for (or, in some cases, against) reform.
The proportion of white sources in these stories was high among law-enforcement sources (54% in 2020, 67% in 2022, 56% in 2023) and, less uniformly, among government sources (54% in 2020, 39% in 2022, 33% in 2023). Black sources were represented most among activists (79% in 2020, 89% in 2023) and advocates (20% in 2020, 58% in 2022, 52% in 2023).
In 2020 and 2022, women were likewise better represented among activists and advocates than among government and law enforcement sources. In 2020, 47% of advocate sources and 36% of activist sources were female, as compared to 22% of government and 17% of law enforcement sources. In 2022, 50% of advocates were female, compared to 13% of government and 22% of law enforcement sources.
In 2023, however, female government sources rose to 38%, a higher proportion of women in that year than among advocates (17%) or activists (29%). (Law enforcement sources continued to be a low 17% women.)
The increases in racial and ethnic diversity from 2020 to 2022 came largely within government sources, with officials quoted including the Black mayor of New York City, Eric Adams; Asian-American House representatives Pramila Jayapal and Ro Khanna; and Hispanic legislators Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ted Cruz.
This diversification of government sources happened along with a shift in partisanship of sources: While Democrats dominated the conversation in 2020, with 51 sources to Republicans’ 25, Republicans were almost entirely absent in 2022, with a single source (Cruz) to Democrats’ 25. The absence of Republican sources continued in 2023, when 18 of 20 sources with party affiliations were Democrats, and one was an independent.
This near-total absence of Republicans from the conversation reflects in part the switch in power at the national level; Republicans controlled both the White House and Senate in 2020, and both had flipped to the Democrats by 2022. It also reflects the reality that the massive nature of the protests forced Republicans to address the issue of police reform in 2020, but they were no longer talking about it much in 2022—nor were outlets like the New York Times forcing them to.
The striking shift in the race of sources in the 2023 time period is not only about the decrease in government sources; it appears to be partly due to the focus on Memphis, where nearly two-thirds of residents and more than half of the police force (including its police chief, and all five of the officers charged with the murder of Nichols) are Black.
In one front-page article (2/5/23) that focused on the “Scorpion” unit that killed Tyre Nichols, headlined “Memphis Unit Driven by Fists and Violence,” a team of six Times reporters quoted 15 different sources, eight of whom were either victims of the unit or family members of victims; all victims and family members were Black. (These were coded as “General Public”: people without a particular professional or activist affiliation, but with experience relevant to the subject they are speaking on.) Only three of the total sources were government officials, and none were law enforcement.
Some articles not exclusively about the Nichols killing still focused on race. “Officers’ Race Turns Focus to System” (1/29/23) featured 14 sources across an array of nine different types of occupations; none were current or former government, and 11 were Black.
The focus on the Tyre Nichols killing also translated at the Times into more of a focus on police accountability, compared with coverage that did not center on police killings. In the absence of a police killing, an article (1/27/23) focused on policing policy appeared under the print-edition headline, “Heavier Police Presence Sees Success as Crime Drops in New York Subways.” It featured four New York government officials, two of whom touted increased policing. Only one advocate questioned those officials, calling for more frequent subway and bus service as an alternative form of public safety. The headline reflects whose narrative was given more credence by the Times.
That such an article so credulous of increased policing, and so light on critical sources, could appear against the backdrop of the Tyre Nichols story illustrates the blinkered nature of the Times‘ improved coverage. While high-profile incidents of police violence might narrowly prompt more critical coverage, systemic shifts in reporting face an uphill battle against corporate media’s longstanding reliance on and trust in government and law enforcement sources to establish the narrative on policing.
In 2020, when protests against police violence erupted across the country, the New York Times covered issues of policing policy and reform with a heavy tilt toward government and law-enforcement sources, and toward white sources.
Activists voicing their grievances against racist, violent policing, and making demands that such policing be rethought in more radical ways, occasionally found their way into the paper of record. Black Futures Lab’s Alicia Garza, for example, was quoted by the Times (6/21/20): “The continual push to shield the police from responsibility helps explain why a lot of people feel now that the police can’t be reformed.”
But their voices were largely drowned out by government officials, many of whom wanted nothing more than to make the protests go away, like Minneapolis city council member Steve Fletcher (6/5/20):
It’s very easy as an activist to call for the abolishment of the police. It is a heavier decision when you realize that it’s your constituents that are going to be the victims of crime you can’t respond to if you dismantle that without an alternative.
In letting government sources dominate again in 2022, Times coverage turned primarily to party politics, rather than investigations into whether reforms had been enacted, and whether or how police tactics had changed. The idea of defunding the police shifted from being presented as a concept to be debated to little more than a political punching bag, with law enforcement sources like former New York police commissioner Bill Bratton (6/9/22) calling the Defund movement “toxic.” Most Democrats distanced themselves from the movement, as when Joe Biden (5/31/22) was quoted: “We should all agree the answer is not to defund the police. It’s to fund the police. Fund them. Fund them.”
When Tyre Nichols was killed by police in 2023, it was not against a backdrop of an election season, nor did it spark protests at the scale of 2020. This time, Times coverage dug a bit deeper at the local level, turning to a wider variety of sources, and resulting in a greater emphasis on the need for police accountability.
While at least one source (1/29/23) called for defunding the police, most critical voices called more generally for accountability, and expressed frustration at the lack of any effective reforms since 2020. For instance, in an article headlined “Many Efforts at Police Reform Remain Stalled” (2/9/23), the president of the NAACP was quoted: “Far too many Black people have lost their lives due to police violence, and yet I cannot name a single law that has been passed to address this issue.”
The shift to a more diverse set of sources on the issue at the Times, during this one-month time period, is commendable. While the circumstances and location of Tyre Nichols’ killing offered strong opportunities to bring in more Black sources, the Times could easily have fallen back on its usual reliance on official sources, as it did in 2020 and 2022. Now it’s incumbent upon the Times to apply that more diverse and critical approach across all policing stories—not only when similarly high-profile police killings rock the country.