The last several years have brought a rapidly shifting and increasingly dangerous legal environment for law enforcement officers across the nation.  The legal landscape is now completely different and represents a constant direct threat to the legal and employment interests of officers. 

This new legal landscape has been caused largely by extremist federal judges, interest groups and politicians with agendas to repeal civil rights protections for officers.  Officers previously enjoyed meaningful federal constitutional protection from adverse action and other injuries under numerous constitutional theories. 

The new legal environment for officers commands a reevaluation of advocacy methodology by officer advocates.  This year appears ripe to begin a new foundation to elect a new breed of chief executives in 2008.

The law enforcement profession continues to be the most abused and disrespected group of employees in history.  However, we have made significant progress in state courts. There is room for a lot of work in state legislatures.  Some state legislatures have enacted some minimum protections for officers.  However, throughout the South, anti-labor sentiment remains strong.    

At the federal level, Congress has failed to legislate any meaningful job or litigation protections for police officers.  Senator Joe Biden has continued to push his bill which would provide solid employment protection for officers across the country.  Many members of the United States House and Senate have refused to support Senator Biden's bill and other bills seeking protection for officers - yet they claim to be supportive of officers at election time and in PBA candidate screenings.

Since 2000, the federal judiciary has slashed legal protections for officers.  The federal courts have overruled precedent that previously provided police officers meaningful constitutional protection.  Federal judges, in the last few years, have stripped officers of virtually all federal constitutional protection.

One of the few remaining fundamental constitutional rights for officers is to not have an involuntary internal affairs statement used against the officer in a criminal proceeding.  This was established in Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 500 (1967).  Now, even Garritty is under attack.  There is strong pressure from anti-officer groups to overrule Garritty.

Anti-officer groups continue to initiate new challenges.  We must respond with new counter-offensive measures.  We need to plan, strategize and develop new weapons because we are in a new kind of cop-hating war.  We are going to have to strengthen our networks of advocacy on Capitol Hill, in the courts, in the state and federal legislatures, in town halls and even in the cornfields.

Officers are often confronted with legal challenges that are multiple, overlapping and dangerous.  Officers must learn to protect themselves legally from the State Bureaus of Investigation, the State  Attorney Generals, the local District Attorney, the local grand jury, the federal grand jury, the United States Attorney, the United States Justice Department, the Criminal Justice or Sheriff's Training and Standards Commissions, the internal affairs units within their own agencies, the personnel departments within their own agencies, management within their own agencies, lawyers representing so-called victims of law enforcement, the press, interest groups and politicians.  Even one of these entities can ruin the officer's job, career, life and family.  Acting together, these forces present pervasive cumulative dangers to the officer that is far worse and more likely deadly than any criminal on the street.

Our enemies are well financed, coordinated and completely dedicated to preventing police officers from enjoying basic legal protections.  Some of these enemies are masquerading as our friends and they regularly try to con us.  Their actions, however, speak much louder than their costumes and their deceptive words.

There was a time in recent history from the early to late 1990s where there were substantial improvements in legal protections for law enforcement officers.   Those days are over.  Those favorable trends have not only died; the changes in the last six years have been horrifying.

The few attorneys who regularly concentrate in representing law enforcement officers in legal disputes have been brainstorming and developing new methods of advocacy.  In addition to our usual routine of evaluating changing statutory and decisional law, we have been exploring ideas for new advocacy. 

The current legal environment for officers is so dangerous that we are compelled to find new and better ways to advocate for the law enforcement profession.

                                         Spotlight on North Carolina

Generally, police officer associations had a frightening year in 2006.   In North Carolina, however, the law enforcement profession has made considerable progress with legal disputes heard in state courts. 

In the last several years, the North Carolina PBA has initiated a number of actions in state court that years earlier we were initiating in federal court.  Most of these state court actions have been very successful.   For example, in Toomer v. Garrett, 155 N.C. App. 462 (2002), the North Carolina Court of Appeals breathed new life into the North Carolina Constitution by clarifying and expanding constitutional protection for officers with disparate treatment and substantive due process claims. 

In In Re Swantee Brooks, 143 N.C. App. 601 (2001), the Court of Appeals recognized privacy interests of officers in their personnel and internal affairs files.  Older PBA cases still provide solid precedent in state courts.  In Howell v. Carolina Beach, 106 N.C. App. 410 (1992), the Court of Appeals recognized Officer Howell's constitutional rights to be free of retaliation for his political activities and free speech.   Many other recent state appellate cases in North Carolina have supported legal rights for officers.

Officers have done better in state courts for several reasons.  The North Carolina state courts have provided a more stable bedrock foundation for officer’s rights in the area of constitutional law.  Since the early 1990s, the North Carolina PBA has concentrated on judicial screenings to identify judicial candidates who better understand the unique legal and other problems confronting the law enforcement profession.  The N.C. PBA worked diligently since the 1990s to focus efforts on supporting better judges.  It worked.  We now have extraordinary North Carolina appellate jurists.

Having been involved in countless PBA judicial and other candidate screenings since the early 1990s, it has been amazing to observe the reactions and positions of judicial candidates as they learned about the true meaning and mission of PBA.  There are still considerable numbers of public officials including judges who do not recognize the fundamental mission of PBA to protect the legal and civil rights of its members. 

Presently, the North Carolina appellate courts are staffed with a number of extraordinary appellate judges who have been enthusiastically endorsed and supported by PBA.  The appellate decisions of many of these fine jurists have been the primary basis for better protection for law enforcement officers in North Carolina. 

The judicial screening process has been invaluable because judicial candidates, whether endorsed or not, learned from the questioning that PBA is not some sort of academic Alaw and order@ group but they learned that PBA is a service organization designed to promote the employment, legal and civil rights of its members and the law enforcement profession.  There are other groups who focus their efforts on criminal justice and law and order issues.  PBA has rather been focused on protecting and advocating for its members to keep them employed in the law enforcement profession and with appropriate legal protections so that officers are not ruined as a result of false or misleading allegations.  When candidates leave the screenings, they know PBA's dedication to civil rights for police officers. 

Despite some favorable developments in decisional law by appellate courts, North Carolina officers still confront a state bureaucracy, administrative agencies and the General Assembly which has been very hostile to law enforcement officers and their families.  There are coordinated efforts by law enforcement opponents to defeat officers rights legislation in the General Assembly.  These groups work actively and aggressively behind the scenes and openly in the General Assembly.  Most of the state agencies that employ law enforcement officers in North Carolina are consistently hostile to the fundamental interest of the working law enforcement profession.

                                    

 The Extremist Federal Judiciary

At the federal level, the anti-officer efforts in the last six years have been terrifying.  The makeup of federal courts has overwhelmingly changed and consequently, the law protecting officer=s rights has materially changed to the point of near death of federal constitutional protection for law enforcement officers.  Most of the federal judges selected in the last five years have long established records of extremism in opposition to labor  and civil rights.  Thus, it is no surprise that this group of judges has virtually destroyed any hope of meaningful constitutional protection for law enforcement officers.  Because these crops of judges have lifetime appointments, we will encounter these decisional law problems for many years to come. 

The new breeds of federal judges have approved ticket quotas for police officers in North Carolina.  The same courts have ruled that officers can be disciplined for testifying against their police administrations even where the testimony is completely truthful.  The horror stories go on and on.

 

                                         Federal Legislative Efforts

At the federal legislative level, the plight of law enforcement officers is almost as horrifying as that in the federal judiciary.  The same anti-officer mentality has appeared in the federal judiciary and the previous Congress.           For generations, there have been various federal bills proposed to promote fundamental officers rights.  Many in Washington believe that the failure to enact minimum due process and related protections at the federal level for police officers is because of a lack of education and advocacy with key members of Congress and the Senate.  Congress has been full of members who claimed to be for "law and order" but who constantly opposed basic civil rights.  The 2006 elections brought hope.  Many of the hard liners were sent home.   

What can be done to refocus federal legislative prospects?  Many believe that one of the essential ingredients is to realign and refocus law enforcement legislative efforts with key members of Congress and the Senate who have historically promoted civil rights.  This appears to be the only hope for federal legislative relief. 

A number of respected Senators have shown tremendous respect for PBA and the rights of officers.  In recent efforts on Capitol Hill, Senators Joe Biden, Edward Kennedy, Pat Leahy, Ken Salazar and others have tirelessly worked to promote civil rights for police officers.

There is reason to have hope in the new Congress taking office in 2007.  The rigid anti-labor and anti-civil rights mentality of the last six years is gone.  Regretfully, there is no reason to be hopeful that the Executive Branch will support officers' rights in the new Congress.  Our Executive Branch has brought us the most frightening federal judiciary that officers have ever encountered.  The new Congress will likely stop the confirmation of extremist judicial candidates who disrespect police officers. Hope is on the way:  2008 is right around the corner.

 

                               Traditional Advocacy Has Often Failed

In many of these areas, the traditional advocacy on many fronts simply has not been successful.  It has not been successful for many reasons, none of which are because there have not been sincere and intense efforts to promote and protect officers in legislative bodies.  The following are some ideas for consideration for new methods of advocacy.

Our only hope for legislative improvements is through more effective politics.  Without elected representatives who understand, respect and appreciate the need for civil rights in the law enforcement profession, we will simply never have legislation to protect officers. 

It is time for a reanalysis and a rethinking of the sort of elected representatives that we need.  Washington and state legislatures have been overwhelmed with so called Aconservatives@ who claim to support enhanced Alaw and order.@  In case after demonstrated case, these types of public officials have not only not been friends to working law enforcement professionals, many are clearly the key enemy.  They have promoted purported so called Alaw and order@ judges who are hostile to labor and civil rights, therefore further oppressing the law enforcement profession. 

We must therefore focus and determine who our real friends are while avoiding buzz words, hollow claims and false promises.  The American labor movement was founded on fundamental principles that government has a vital role in protecting civil rights.  Police labor advocates have long needed a new energy but with use of our traditional allies.

In the political screening process, we must be very careful to not accept the unsupported contentions and promises of various candidates, some of whom will say anything to earn a PBA endorsement.  Many people aspiring to elected office have demonstrated records.  With minimum effort, those records can be identified.  We must be very careful to thoroughly scrutinize the real records of candidates as opposed to relying upon what they tell us in the screening process. 

The real issues boil down to the following: does this candidate's actual record demonstrate that he/she is the best candidate who understands and will support our real mission of protecting the employment, legal and civil rights of law enforcement officers?    

 

                                 Enhanced Political Activity Is Crucial

A necessary component of these and other new strategies for enhancing protection for the law enforcement profession necessitates that we convince rank and file officers that they must become more politically active.  Paying dues once a month is not going to accomplish the broader mission. 

Successful political advocacy can be developed with minimum time and effort if the rank and file will become politically engaged.  A few hours of dedicated work each month and then with concentrated efforts a week prior to election could change the legislative landscape for the law enforcement profession.

Enhanced protections for the law enforcement profession will not come about as result of efforts in one isolated area.  We need a concentrated and coordinated effort advocating before all branches of government: judicial, legislative and executive. 

We have a mission and issues that are very appealing to many segments of society including legislatures.  However, we must work Asmarter@ and realign with new advocacy and public officials who truly respect labor and civil rights.  

 

                                                          Ideas

Unless we develop some new ideas and additional means of advocacy, the law enforcement profession will continue to rapidly deteriorate.  Here are some ideas for consideration. 

Do something to help promote a better understanding of how terribly police officers are treated.   Officers know that they are often treated worse than criminals, but the public and elected officials are largely unaware.

Embrace our issues as fundamental civil rights.  Our many different needed rights boil down to basic civil rights.  The right to organize, advocate, engage in free expression and free association, the rights to equal protection and due process, and the right to counsel. 

Help a fallen comrade.  Show up at an officer's unemployment hearing or grievance.  When an officer is under attack, the enemy might not be so quick to falsely allege if they realize that targeting one officer is like targeting us all. 

Make a commitment for some minimum time to organize law enforcement in your community.  A small dedicated team can work wonders.  Strength is often dependent upon numbers.  Organization is the key.

Evaluate on records and substance, and not on labels.  Be leery of self proclaimed labels by politicians.  So called "conservatives" usually claim to "support law enforcement."  Most all of them despise organized labor or any groups who advocate for civil rights.  Cut through to the real issues.  Don't buy their self proclaimed labels.

Focus on elected bodies who can legislate help for the law enforcement profession.

Support a vigorous program of appellate advocacy by participating in appeals as an amicus curiae ("friend of the court").     Start a local political action committee. Educate your local officials on what really matters for the law enforcement profession.

Encourage retired law enforcement officers to run for office.  Then get out and work to elect them.

Educate yourselves thoroughly.  Prepare and arm yourself with recent verifiable data.  Advocate with evidence and passion.

Periodically meet with your local senator and representative.  Take a dozen cops with you, with spouses and some children.  Treat them with complete respect.  Quote Lyndon Johnson: "Come, let us reason together."  But let them know you mean business.  Stay in touch with them.

Talk to your local judges.  Take them to breakfast, not just at election time, but twice a year.  Let them feel your pain.  Educate other important elected officials such as Clerks of Superior Court.

Get your spouses on board.  Your family is most important but they can spare you a few weekends a year.

Educate the media.  While many reporters are very smart, many do not understand the basic duties of police officers.  Talk to them.  Take them on a ride along.

Write professional letters to the editor for your local and regional newspaper. 

Attend political functions.  Shake some palms; slap some backs; it won't kill you.  Let them know you are there and aware.