ACLU Issues Handbook on “The Rights of Police Officers”
As part of its Rights Handbook series, the ACLU on this day published a handbook: The Rights of Police Officers.
In the 1980s and beyond, however, police unions aggressively negotiated union contract provisions that were impediments to holding officers accountable for misconduct. The provisions included required delays in when an officer could be questioned by supervisors, the right of officers to purge their disciplinary files in some contracts, and requirements that officers be disciplined with a certain number of days after the incident in question (which led some some internal investigations being dismissed). As a result, police unions and their contracts became one of the principal obstacles to holding police officers accountable for their actions.
The ACLU was prominently active in challenging police misconduct—and was often attacked by the police as a result.The ACLU filed influential amicus briefs with the Supreme Court in both the Mapp v. Ohio (1961) case which established the exclusionary rule, and the Miranda v. Arizona (1966) which established the right of arrested persons to remain silent when questioned by the police. For one of the standard police attacks on the ACLU, see October 13, 1970.
The ACLU recognized that police officers a employees have constitutional rights, particularly with regard to First Amendment and due process issues. The New York Civil Liberties Union, in fact, criticized the techniques used by the investigation of police corruption in the New York City Police Department because of the violations of civil liberties on October 22, 1971.
Outdated, but still useful: Gilda Brancato and Elliot E. Polebaum, The Rights of Police Officers (1981)
Learn more at the ACLU web site.
Learn more about the ACLU’s work on Reforming Police Practices.
Read about the latest developments in police accountability: Samuel Walker and Carol Archbold, The New World of Police Accountability, 3rd ed. (2020)