Unions, County Attorney Condemn Explosive DOJ Report on Phoenix Police Civil Rights Abuses

At a press conference on Tuesday, police unions and the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office sharply criticized a Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation into the Phoenix Police Department. The federal probe concluded that officers routinely violated civil and constitutional rights and employed excessive, illegal force.

The Arizona Police Association (APA), which represents officers throughout the state, countered the findings, claiming they were not representative of the department’s overall conduct. Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell dismissed the report’s methodology, stating, “The DOJ focused on a precious few cases. They used a tiny, tiny sample to find exactly what they wanted to find. The report doesn’t even pass the smell test.”

Several law enforcement agencies and advocacy groups have also voiced opposition to the report. The investigation revealed systemic violations of the rights of homeless individuals, protesters, and minority residents in Phoenix.

The APA expressed concerns that the DOJ report might lead to the imposition of a consent decree. Such a measure would place the Phoenix Police Department under federal oversight, mandating significant reforms. Former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has previously criticized consent decrees, questioning their effectiveness.

APA President Justin Harris echoed this sentiment, arguing, “The Department of Justice, based on their own numbers, has a 30-year track record of totally disastrous failures. Why bring that into this city?”

Despite the heated rhetoric, evidence on the efficacy of consent decrees is mixed. Though not conclusive in linking them to increased crime rates, research suggests that they can enhance accountability and public satisfaction with police departments.

The DOJ has yet to decide on whether to enforce a consent decree against the Phoenix Police Department. In a bid to avoid this outcome, city officials have requested a “technical assistance letter” instead. This alternative would allow the DOJ to make recommendations without imposing binding changes.