In the wake of George Floyd’s murder at the hand of Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin and the subsequent movement of protests nationwide, many police departments are pressured to revisit their policies regarding use of force and officer accountability. In Hartford, city council members establish a civilian review board to monitor police abuses. Council members renew their request that the federal court not sunset Cintron until more progress is made in officer accountability and department diversity. Reference to the national atmosphere is made explicit in the resolution: “WHEREAS, during the last few months, our nation has been ethically and morally racked by the murder of people of color by members of different police departments around the country; and WHEREAS, these murders have resulted in rioting and civil unrest in all corners of our nation; and WHEREAS, the Cintron v. Vaughn Consent Decree and the related communication and negotiations between the Plaintiffs and the Hartford Police department is one of many tools to foster racial and disciplinary progress in the Hartford Police Department; and WHEREAS, such avenues of reform and progress in how our City polices its communities is necessary and critical especially at this time in our nation’s history…” (Source Link opens PDF) 

It is striking how close this resolution gets to a structural condemnation of policing in Hartford, even though it locates police murders elsewhere—in “different police departments around the country”—instead of acknowledging those that have occurred at home. There were 66 police killings in Connecticut in 2019, almost all of which were excused by state attorneys. (Source)   

Despite the questionable commitments which motivate decisions made under public pressure, Connecticut’s state legislation signed into law an impressive piece of reformative legislation, the Police Accountability Act. It includes a range of reform measures relating to police operations, legal accountability, and decertification. Some provisions are obviously ineffective despite being lauded in the media, such as a rule that officers intervene when they witness their cohort using excessive force. The rule was inspired by footage of George Floyd’s death which was circulated widely on the internet during the summer of 2020. Anyone who has studied policing will see through this gesture of performativity, understanding that police officers generally use and rationalize force according to their department’s culture and their individual temperament rather than the letter of the law. This understanding was prevalent during Hartford’s citywide debates surrounding deadly force in 1970 which continue to reverberate through the community. During the 1970 City Council probe into police use of force, committee members minimized the saliency of written rule as a rationale behind their decision to refrain from recommending stricter guidelines: “no matter what the guidelines, whether they are made more loose, or more restrictive, when the police officer exercises judgment in a split-second what really comes into play is his training, his deportment, his attitude, his intelligence, good judgment, discipline as well as self-discipline.” (Source) Additionally, the 2020 law underestimates the lived experience of bonds between officers, those “brothers in blue” who are notoriously resistant to interference from those outside their department. 

Despite instances of performativity, the Police Accountability Act also includes serious and brave efforts towards change. One of the most potentially efficacious aspects of the legislation is § 41 CIVIL CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST POLICE OFFICERS WHO DEPRIVE INDIVIDUALS OF CERTAIN RIGHTS, which is intended to enable citizens to sue police officers in civil suits more easily if their rights have been violated. The section provides new causes of action to sue, and prevents officers from being covered by governmental immunity in some cases. As state representative Raghib Allie-Brennan explains, “The offenses that trigger the limits on qualified immunity must be deliberate and extremely serious – such as false arrest, sexual assault of a detainee, or murder.” Qualified immunity provides major protection for officers who have performed misconduct, even if deliberate and malicious. Any curb on this “shield” against accountability, as attorney Joana Schwartz put it in her book Shielded, is a major step forward.