ACLU OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
P.O. BOX 11637
WASHINGTON, DC 20008
(202) 457-0800
WWW.ACLUDC.ORG
Statement on behalf of the
American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia
before the
DC Council Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety
Public Roundtable on “Chief of the Metropolitan Police Department Peter Newsham
Confirmation Resolution of 2017”
Friday, March 24, 2017
by
Monica Hopkins-Maxwell, Executive Director
Good morning, Councilmember Allen and members of the Committee. My name is Monica HopkinsMaxwell and I am the Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of the District of
Columbia (ACLU-DC). I present the following testimony on behalf of our more than 11,000 members in
the District.
As a matter of organizational policy, the ACLU does not take a position supporting or opposing Mayoral
appointments or candidates for office. We do, however, aim to educate District residents about
nominees’ records and past positions. My testimony today will focus on the selection process for the
position of police chief as well as on Mr. Newsham’s record on civil rights and civil liberties.
Transparency and Community Engagement in Selecting A Police Chief
As the District’s highest-ranking law enforcement officer, the Chief of Police has the ultimate
responsibility to set the tone for how a police department interacts with the community in conducting its
business of solving and preventing crimes.
The selection of a new police chief provides an opportunity to look at our current police practices with a
critical eye and decide what outcomes and positive changes we want to see in our community. Only
once we have done that can we identify the type of leadership that would produce these outcomes.
Meaningful community engagement in the hiring and promotion of law enforcement officers to
leadership positions is of critical importance to building a “foundation for stronger officer-community
relationships over time”1 and is also a recommendation of President Obama’s Taskforce on 21st Century
policing.2
1
The American Bar Association’s Task Force On Building Public Trust in The American Justice System, (highlighting
priorities of President Obama’s Taskforce on 21st Century Policing), page 16,
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/office_president/2_8_task_force_on_building_trust_in_america
n_justice_system.authcheckdam.pdf
2
https://cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/TaskForce_FinalReport.pdf
While we commend Councilmember Allen and the Judiciary Committee for hosting a series of public
roundtables in the community on Mr. Newsham’s nomination, we feel there should have been
significant community input incorporated into the selection process ahead of this confirmation stage.
Community input at both stages – 1) deciding in what direction the police department should go, and 2)
deciding if a candidate possesses the qualifications and motivations to get us there – is crucial to
building a DC that is safe and healthy for all DC residents.
According to the Washington Post, there were more than 100 applicants for the chief of police position
and the Mayor first narrowed the pool to 12, and then to 4, before nominating Interim Chief Newsham.3
It seems there were several missed opportunities for the Mayor to gather community feedback on both
the criteria she was seeking in a police chief as well as on the candidate finalists during this process,
both of which would have fostered greater trust between the community and MPD.4
Interim Chief Newsham’s Record on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
On January 12th, I testified before this committee about preparations for the Presidential Inauguration
and expressed my concerns about how MPD planned to respond to groups exercising their first
amendment right to assembly, specifically how MPD would ensure that officers avoided escalating
conflicts and violating demonstrators’ Constitutional rights. The ACLU had seen this very thing happen
during the World Bank Protests of 2002, at which Peter Newsham, then an assistant chief of police,
ordered the arrest of hundreds of protesters after they were corralled and detained – some for 30 hours—
in handcuffs and wrist-to-ankle restraints, and with limited access to food and toilets.5
The right to join with fellow citizens in protest or peaceful assembly is critical to a functioning
democracy. When governments and police violate this right – through the use of mass arrests,
illegal use of force, criminalization of protest, and other means intended to chill free public
expression – they threaten our basic civil rights and civil liberties.
Newsham’s significant lapse of judgment that day led to costly lawsuits for District taxpayers, an
independent investigation of MPD, and eventually, to an overhaul of police practices to protect the first
amendment rights of protesters,6 as found in the resulting Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for
Handling First Amendment Assemblies and Mass Demonstrations by MPD.
3
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/newsham-to-be-named-dc-police-according-to-officials-familiar-withthe-process/2017/02/23/a35f882c-d1b6-11e6-a783-cd3fa950f2fd_story.html?utm_term=.5740b6a66230
4
For example, Phoenix, AZ held 7 community meetings to get feedback on what traits/qualities constituents found most
important in a police chief, over 1200 residents were surveyed, and the HR department created the job listing from this
feedback. The three finalists (of which Peter Newsham was one) then answered questions at a public candidates forum.
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix-breaking/2016/06/07/police-chief-finalists-answer-phoenix-residentsquestions/85539356/.
5
Arrestees were charged with failing to obey police orders, but no order to disperse was ever given and those who tried to
leave her physically prevented from doing so.
6
“In response to the concerns about mass arrests, the D.C. Council passed limits on police powers in 2005, and set
requirements for police training and retention of dispatch, video and command data and materials collected to prevent
destruction of evidence. The Council also prohibited arrests for ‘parading’ or demonstrating without a permit, set a four-hour
standard for releasing protest-related arrestees, and required written disclosure of release rights.” available at
Page2
Unfortunately, under Newsham’s leadership as interim police chief, MPD repeated some of the same
tactics used in Pershing Park in its response to the J20 protests on Inauguration Day of this year. By
using pepper spray and stingers without justification on crowds of people who were not breaking the law
or who had already been detained, mass detaining and arresting over 200 individuals – including
journalists and legal observers – without giving any warnings to disperse, and holding individuals
outdoors for hours without allowing them access to food, water, or bathrooms, MPD officers violated
the SOP and demonstrated a serious lack of respect for the Constitutional rights of those present.
The ACLU-DC has asked for an independent investigation into MPD’s disproportionate response on
J20, as has the Police Complaints Board.7 Given the seriousness of these allegations, we think it right
that this investigation be completed and its results made public before the DC Council votes to confirm
any nominee for MPD police chief.
Transparency In Policing And Building Community Trust
Interim Chief Newsham was recently quoted in the Post as saying that under his leadership, MPD would
stand for “unbiased, fair and Constitutional policing”8 and that the department would prioritize
maintaining a trusting relationship with the community.
But before trust can be maintained, it must be built.9 Police officers are armed with extraordinary powers
not only to stop people, arrest suspects, and present criminal charges, but to cause injury or death.
Though officers generally use these powers legitimately to prevent and investigate violations of the law,
at times police also abuse their powers. The costs of police misconduct are great. They jeopardize
community safety and erode trust that officers need from community members to effectively protect and
serve. It is imperative to hold officers accountable when they use excessive force, false arrest, or commit
other civil rights violations. And its just as important to be transparent about how MPD conducts its
internal investigations into alleged police abuse of power.10 The deaths of Terrence Sterling and Gerald
Javon Hall at the hands of MPD police officers has most recently shaken the community’s trust in law
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/in-settlement-us-park-police-agree-to-change-arrest-policies-inprotests/2015/06/22/20b0080a-15f3-11e5-9ddc-e3353542100c_story.html?utm_term=.f02df2210a13
7
The Police Complaints Board’s report on the Inauguration day protest largely corroborates our understanding of the events:
“OPC monitors did observe police activity that raised concerns on how the protests were handled, including MPD officers
using force at times on some of the protesters, dispersing OC spray and stingers into the crowd without an order or warning
and arresting individuals who were not involved in any rioting or acts of vandalism.” available at
https://policecomplaints.dc.gov/release/police-complaints-board-releases-protest-monitoring-reports-2017-inauguration-andwomen%E2%80%99s
8
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/newsham-to-be-named-dc-police-according-to-officials-familiar-withthe-process/2017/02/23/a35f882c-d1b6-11e6-a783-cd3fa950f2fd_story.html?utm_term=.573522068ef5
9
The ACLU-DC surveyed 501 DC residents in 2015 on their views of MPD’s transparency and relationship with the
community. Over 50 percent responded that there was not enough transparency in MPD, and by 2-1, respondents answered
that they believed police monitor neighborhoods and don’t build relationships to strengthen communities.
10
Reasons for mistrust between communities and law enforcement include “the prevalence of unconstitutional stops and
arrests, excessive use of force, poor training and supervision of police, lack of accountability for police misconduct and
disproportionately harsh treatment of people of color in charging and sentencing.” From the ABA Taskforce on Building
Public Trust in the American Justice System, found at
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/office_president/2_8_task_force_on_building_trust_in_america
n_justice_system.authcheckdam.pdf
Page3
enforcement, and the lack of public transparency about MPD’s internal investigations into these deaths
has shaken it further.
To effectively build trust with the community, we feel it necessary for MPD to prioritize transparency
and accountability about its internal disciplinary policies and procedures, as well as the outcome of its
investigations into police misconduct, use of force, and the consequences for officers who have been
found to abuse their power.
Focusing on Community Solutions to Public Safety
Finally, building community trust also relies on acknowledging that public safety must be co-produced
between the community and police.
While we are glad to see Interim Chief Newsham’s acknowledgment that adding more police is not the
answer to increasing public safety,11 we would want a police chief to go farther by agreeing to redirect
budgetary funds to more substantial community-based programs. For too long, police have become the
default responders to a myriad of societal problems that can and should be solved within communities,
while community-based public health interventions have simultaneously been underfunded. Police
cannot take the place of social workers, drug counselors, or mental health professionals.
We have witnessed the success of collaborative community driven strategies from other jurisdictions.
For example, Cincinnati, Ohio transformed its broken system by adopting community, problem-oriented
policing that required the Cincinnati police department to do fewer out-and-out arrests, and instead work
collaboratively with the community to solve the problems that cause people to commit crimes in the first
place. A community advisory committee was created to address these concerns and it had five goals:
1) To make police officers and community members proactive partners in community
problem solving
2) To build relationships of respect, cooperation, and trust within and between
communities and the police,
3) To improve education, oversight, monitoring, hiring practices, and accountability of
the police department,
4) To ensure fair, equitable, and courteous treatment for all, and
5) To create methods to establish the public’s understanding of police policies and
procedures and recognition of exceptional service in an effort to foster support for the
police.12
11
Quote by Peter Newsham: “There’s no way in the world the police department will be successful in addressing [public
safety] alone. There’s a recipe for criminal behavior. Lots of things contribute to it—education, jobs, housing. The mayor
has held other agencies accountable, but I don’t know if folks in politics understand that if you go out and say the answer
is more police. … Look, anyone who knows anything about crime knows that increasing the size of the department
doesn’t have anything to do with reducing crime. We had the lowest violent crime rate last year since 2009." Found at
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/news/loose-lips/article/20853303/an-interview-with-peter-newsham-dcs-top-cop
12
These reforms were adopted as a result of a class settlement in a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and the Black United Front
against the City of Cincinnati: http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/police/linkservid/27A205F1-69E9-4446BC18BD146CB73DF2/showMeta/0/
Page4
Between 1999-2014, Cincinnati saw a 69 percent reduction in police use-of-force incidents, a 42 percent
reduction in citizen complaints, and a 56 percent reduction in citizen injuries during encounters with
police13 once it adopted community driven reforms that resulted from these efforts.
Conclusion
Regardless of who sits at the helm of MPD as police chief, moving the criminal justice system out of the
center of our public safety solutions is necessary to reduce the number of confrontational encounters
with law enforcement.
As the District, we must build consensus around the need to resolve this past imbalance of increasing the
budget for the police department while underfunding community-based solutions for achieving public
safety. We have previously testified about our support for full funding and implementation of the NEAR
Act as key to achieving a public health approach to public safety, and we hope to see the confirmed
MPD chief support this approach as well, in their statements, and more importantly, in their actions.
Finally, it goes without saying that for any police chief that is confirmed, the ACLU of DC will continue
to hold them and the MPD accountable to District residents and to the Constitution.
13
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/05/cincinnati-police-reform/393797/
Page5