The order is not a “racial and gender-based “equity” policy,” but rather a “racial and gender-based approach to enabling officers to focus on fighting crime.
President Donald Trump has ordered the Justice Department to take steps to strengthen law enforcement resources and prevent executives from focusing on equity policy.
“When local leaders demonize law enforcement and impose legal and political handcuffs that make the law actively impossible, crime thrives and innocent citizens and small business owners suffer,” Trump said in an executive order on April 28th.
“So my administration is: establishing best practices at the state and local levels for cities to unleash local police, protecting and defending law enforcement officials who have been mistakenly accused and abused by state or local officials.
Part of his order targets “an illegal race and gender-based ‘equitable’ policies” and directs the Attorney General to “take all appropriate measures to provide legal resources and compensation.”
Trump’s orders also seek to boost law enforcement resources by directing final provisions of excess military and national security assets to support authorities. Under the order, the Attorney General is directed to maximize the use of federal resources for a variety of purposes, including increasing officer salaries and benefits, promoting investment in prison safety, and expanding access to training available to state and local law enforcement agencies.
Another aspect of the order directed obstruction of criminal law and called for state and local officials to be held accountable for illegally involved in civil rights violations under the guise of a ‘diversity, equity and inclusion’ initiative.
The executive order came on the same day Trump signed the other two. These include those focused on leading jurisdictions with so-called sanctuary policies to comply with federal law. In it, he accused some state and local officials of using their powers to engage in “lawless riots” to prevent federal immigration enforcement.
The order follows a lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice in response to local officials allegedly acting against federal immigration enforcement.
Last week, the department sued the city of Rochester in New York over sanctuary policies. The lawsuit, filed in federal court, accused Mayor Rochester Mayor Malik Evans of accusing local police of potentially violating city policies by responding to a request from the Department of Homeland Security on March 24. Evans said immigration enforcement is a function of the federal government and that local police will not support federal immigration enforcement.
A similar lawsuit filed in February targeted state officials over New York’s Greenlight Act. This will prevent non-citizens from applying for driver’s licenses and preventing the motor vehicle department from sharing information with immigration enforcement.
On April 25, the Department of Justice said a Milwaukee County judge was charged with allegedly interfering with federal law enforcement agencies related to Mexican citizens previously excluded from the United States.
Justice Hannah Dugan’s lawyer said at a court hearing that his client “has sincerely regretted her and is protesting her arrest. It was not made for public safety.” FBI director Kash Patel announced her arrest on April 25, saying on social media that her “obstruction has made the public more dangerous.”
Trump has encountered a wave of lawsuits in recent months. It includes some of the sanctuary’s jurisdiction and his targets for diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
On the same day as the case, a federal judge pre-prevented the administration from cutting back on funding for cities that would adopt sanctuary policies. On January 20, Trump had signed an executive order directing the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to evaluate and undertake legal cases to prevent the so-called ‘sanctuary’ jurisdictions from receiving access to federal funds.
US District Judge William Ollick said in opinion that Trump’s attempts to withhold funds allocated by Congress violated the separation of powers and spending clauses in the country that allow Congress to tax and spend its revenue.
