Why Federal Police Misconduct Oversight is Vanishing Right Now
By Darius Spearman (africanelements)
Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.
The federal government is making a major shift in how it handles police oversight. For decades, the Department of Justice acted as a watchdog for local police departments. This role was vital for many Black communities that felt local systems could not be trusted. However, recent reports show that this watchdog is losing its teeth. Many experts are concerned that this change will leave citizens without a final place to turn for justice. (theguardian.com)
The teams responsible for investigating police misconduct are shrinking at an alarming rate. According to a recent report, veteran attorneys are leaving the Department of Justice in large numbers. This loss of staff is not an accident. It is part of a larger plan to move away from federal oversight of local law enforcement. As these teams disappear, so does the ability to hold entire departments accountable for systemic abuse. (govexec.com)
Civil Rights Division Staffing Levels (2025-2026)
The Birth of Federal Power After Rodney King
To understand the current crisis, one must look at the history of police reform. Before the early 1990s, the federal government had very little power to fix entire police departments. They could only prosecute one officer at a time for a specific crime. This changed after the world watched the beating of Rodney King by Los Angeles police officers in 1991. The brutality of that event showed that individual trials were not enough to fix a culture of violence. (cbsnews.com)
Public anger led to the passage of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. This law created Section 14141, which is now known as 34 U.S.C. § 12601. It gave the Attorney General the power to sue police departments that showed a “pattern or practice” of violating civil rights. This was a revolutionary tool. It allowed the government to look at how a department operated as a whole instead of focusing on a few “bad apples.” (jurist.org)
This law was the foundation for long-standing racial injustice battles in the legal system. It meant that if a department routinely used excessive force or targeted Black citizens, the federal government could step in. These investigations were meant to change the very heart of how policing was done in America. Without this authority, many departments would have continued their practices without any outside pressure to improve. (justice.gov)
How Consent Decrees Transformed Local Policing
The most powerful outcome of these investigations was the “consent decree.” A consent decree is a legal agreement between the Department of Justice and a local city. It is overseen by a federal judge and an independent monitor. These agreements forced departments to change their rules on using force and tracking misconduct. The LAPD underwent this process in 2001 after a massive corruption scandal. (jurist.org, theguardian.com)
Consent decrees were very popular during the Obama administration. Between 2009 and 2016, the government opened 25 “pattern or practice” investigations. They looked into cities like Ferguson, Baltimore, and Chicago. These cities were often struggling with deep-seated mistrust between the police and the community. The federal government acted as a referee to make sure that civil rights were protected and that real changes were made on the ground. (theguardian.com)
For many, these decrees represented the only path toward struggles for justice in a system that often protects its own. They provided a roadmap for reform that was backed by the power of a federal court. If a city failed to meet its goals, a judge could issue fines or even take control of the department. This level of accountability is what made federal intervention so effective and so controversial for some. (jurist.org)
The Sudden Exit of Civil Rights Experts
Today, the teams that manage these complex legal cases are falling apart. A recent Reuters report highlights a “staffing plunge” within the Special Litigation Section. This is the unit that handles the most serious police misconduct probes. Many veteran lawyers have left through a program called “deferred resignations.” In this program, employees are offered money to quit their jobs and promise not to sue the government. (theguardian.com, govexec.com)
The loss of these employees means a loss of “institutional memory.” These are the people who know how to analyze years of police data and negotiate with local officials. Reports indicate that the Civil Rights Division has lost between 60% and 75% of its trial attorneys in certain areas. This makes it almost impossible to maintain existing consent decrees or start new investigations into police brutality. (govexec.com)
The current administration has also changed the priorities of the remaining staff. Instead of looking for excessive force, leadership is focusing on different issues. This includes investigating “DEI” policies in schools and businesses. Resources are being moved away from the oversight of police and toward lawsuits against programs that promote diversity. This shift represents a fundamental change in the mission of the Civil Rights Division. (jacksonlewis.com, theguardian.com)
A total freeze on new pattern-or-practice probes into local police departments.
Why the National Misconduct Database Matters
One of the most significant losses for police accountability is the shutdown of the National Law Enforcement Accountability Database. This database was launched in 2023 to track “wandering officers.” These are police who are fired for misconduct in one town and then get hired in another town nearby. Without a central list, it is very difficult for departments to know if a new hire has a history of violence. (justice.gov)
The database was decommissioned in early 2025 by an executive order. The administration stated that they prefer local tracking instead of federal lists. However, local tracking is often incomplete and does not work across state lines. Over 10,000 agencies used the national database to vet their hires. Now, that tool is gone, making it easier for officers with a history of bias to stay in uniform. (civilrights.org)
This is a major concern for addressing historical racial injustices in the criminal justice system. Studies show that officers with past records of misconduct are more likely to use excessive force again. Small police departments often lack the money to do deep background checks. They were the ones who benefited the most from a free federal database. Now, the burden of finding “bad apples” falls entirely on local agencies that may not have the resources to do it. (civilrights.org, theguardian.com)
From Police Reform to Investigating Diversity Programs
The Department of Justice is not just shrinking; it is changing its focus entirely. There is a new emphasis on using the False Claims Act to target “Civil Rights Fraud.” This initiative looks for organizations that receive federal money and have diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. The government argues that these programs might be a form of illegal discrimination against people who are not in minority groups. (jacksonlewis.com)
This shift uses “Qui Tam” lawsuits. These are cases where private citizens, or whistleblowers, sue on behalf of the government. If the lawsuit is successful, the whistleblower can get a portion of the money. The Department of Justice is encouraging people to report schools or companies that use DEI in their hiring. This uses resources that used to go toward investigating police shootings or racial profiling. (fd.org)
This move is part of a broader effort to re-evaluate the history of education and employment in the United States. By focusing on “merit-based” hiring, the government is moving away from the traditional goals of the Civil Rights Division. Instead of protecting minority groups from systemic abuse, the focus is now on stopping programs that were designed to help those very groups. This pivot has left many civil rights advocates worried about the future of federal protection. (jacksonlewis.com, theguardian.com)
Budgetary resources have shifted 30% toward fraud investigations.
The Hidden Risks of Wandering Officers
The term “wandering officer” describes a dangerous cycle in American law enforcement. When an officer is caught lying or using too much force, they often resign before they can be fired. This allows them to keep a clean record. They then move to a different police department in a different county or state. This cycle is very common and very hard to stop without federal help. (theguardian.com)
Black communities are often the most affected by these officers. Research shows that wandering officers often end up in smaller, underfunded departments. These departments are usually in areas where citizens have less political power. Without a national database, the history of an officer is effectively erased once they cross a state line. This creates a situation where a single bad officer can cause harm in multiple communities over a long career. (civilrights.org, theguardian.com)
The loss of federal oversight means that there is no one to watch the watchers. In the past, the Department of Justice could identify these patterns across different agencies. They could warn cities about hiring people with a history of civil rights violations. Now, that safety net is gone. The responsibility for checking an officer’s background is back in the hands of the departments themselves, many of whom have failed at this task in the past. (justice.gov)
Can State Governments Fill the Accountability Gap?
With the federal government stepping back, some people hope that state governments will step up. A few states, like California and Illinois, have passed their own “pattern or practice” laws. This allows the state Attorney General to sue local police departments for misconduct. This is a positive step, but it is not enough to replace the power of the Department of Justice. (theguardian.com)
Most states do not have these laws. Even in states that do, the Attorney General often lacks the budget to handle a major city like Chicago or Los Angeles. Investigating a police department takes millions of dollars and years of work. Many state offices are also very close to local police unions. These unions have a lot of political power and can make it difficult for a state official to push for real reform. (theguardian.com)
The Department of Justice was always seen as the “last resort” because it was outside of local politics. Federal investigators did not need to worry about being re-elected by local voters or supported by local unions. They could be more objective and push for deeper changes. As the federal government scales back, many worry that police reform will become a matter of which state you live in, rather than a universal right for all citizens. (govexec.com, theguardian.com)
About the Author
Darius Spearman is a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College, where he has been teaching for over 20 years. He is the founder of African Elements, a media platform dedicated to providing educational resources on the history and culture of the African diaspora. Through his work, Spearman aims to empower and educate by bringing historical context to contemporary issues affecting the Black community.
