Two-Sides of the Same Coin: Courts and Cops How Courts and Police Work Hand-in-Hand to Perpetuate Discrimination in Memphis and Across America
Special Report by
Public Affairs Staff on December 10, 2024
MEMPHIS, TN —— For decades, the systemic abuses of police departments across America have been laid bare through investigative journalism, civil rights lawsuits, and federal investigations. But while police departments are often the focus of public outrage, the courts—tasked with delivering justice—play an equally pivotal role in perpetuating systemic discrimination and abuse. From shielding officers with doctrines like qualified immunity to rubber-stamping discriminatory practices, the judiciary often functions as an enabler of the very systems it is supposed to hold accountable.
The case of Memphis is a stark example. Following a Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation that found the Memphis Police Department (MPD) guilty of excessive force, unlawful stops, and racial discrimination, city leaders are rejecting federal oversight, arguing they can reform themselves. But history and national research suggest otherwise: such reforms are impossible without structural change, especially when the courts themselves are complicit in the system’s failings.
Judicial Complicity: A History of Enabling Abuse
Across the nation, court rulings have systematically undermined accountability efforts. In Memphis, like elsewhere, judicial deference to law enforcement is a recurring theme. A study by The Appeal found that in over 90% of cases involving police misconduct allegations, courts sided with officers, often dismissing claims before they even reach trial. This trend emboldens police departments to continue unconstitutional practices, knowing the courts will likely protect them.
“The judiciary has essentially given police departments a blank check to abuse their authority,” said one local attorney who spoke on conditions of anonymity “How can we expect systemic change when the courts refuse to hold bad actors accountable?”
Racial Bias and the Courts
The DOJ’s findings against MPD are not unique; they mirror patterns found in other cities like Minneapolis, Louisville, and Phoenix. Racial discrimination, particularly against Black residents, is deeply embedded in policing practices nationwide. But what is often overlooked is the role courts play in normalizing this bias.
Studies reveal that racial bias is not only present in police departments but is often mirrored in judicial decision-making. A 2023 report by the Sentencing Project found that judges are significantly more likely to dismiss discrimination claims brought by Black plaintiffs compared to white plaintiffs. In cases involving excessive force, courts are more likely to side with officers when the victim is Black, citing “split-second decision-making” as justification.
In Memphis, this systemic bias plays out in real-time. The MPD has long been accused of targeting Black residents with unconstitutional stops and arrests, and the courts have consistently dismissed these claims, citing insufficient evidence or procedural technicalities. Without judicial accountability, systemic change becomes little more than a talking point.
The Myth of Self-Reform
The refusal of Memphis leaders to accept a federal consent decree is rooted in the flawed belief that the city can reform itself. Mayor Paul Young, Interim Police Chief CJ Davis, and City Attorney Tannera Gibson have all argued that local collaboration and community engagement can drive meaningful change. But national research proves otherwise.
Consent decrees are not merely bureaucratic tools; they are court-enforced agreements designed to ensure accountability and transparency. In cities like Newark and Cleveland, federal oversight has led to significant reductions in police misconduct and improved community relations. But these changes only occurred because the courts were willing to intervene and enforce reforms. Without federal oversight, cities like Memphis are likely to perpetuate the same unconstitutional practices.
Why the DOJ Must Intervene
The DOJ’s findings against Memphis are among the most damning in recent years, yet city leaders are dismissing the need for federal oversight. This is not just a Memphis problem—it’s a national one. The courts have consistently failed to uphold the constitutional rights of marginalized communities, allowing systemic abuses to thrive.
Civil rights advocates argue that the DOJ must not only enforce a consent decree in Memphis but also address the broader issue of judicial complicity. Without systemic reforms at both the policing and judicial levels, the cycle of abuse and discrimination will continue.
“The courts and police departments are two sides of the same coin,” said a local law professor who spoke on conditions of anonymity. “You can’t fix one without addressing the other.”
Conclusion: A System Rigged Against Reform
As Memphis grapples with the fallout of the DOJ’s investigation, the city’s leaders continue to reject meaningful accountability. But their refusal to accept a consent decree is not just a failure of leadership—it is a reflection of a broader system rigged against reform. The judiciary, which should serve as a check on unconstitutional policing, has instead become its enabler.
Until both police departments and the courts are held accountable, systemic discrimination will remain an enduring stain on America’s justice system. Memphis is not just a city in crisis—it is a cautionary tale for the nation.
About Post Author
