Lably
Skip to content

United States v. City of Portland

Lawsuit

  • 23 min read
  • 5 chapters

Explore on Lably

ToursExplore Lably’s 3D tours

The lawsuit was filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. § 14141 against the City of Portland.

Background

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Oregon and the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, based their findings on more than a year of investigation, and sought injunctive and declaratory relief.

Specifically, the DOJ claimed: (1) Portland police encounters with such individuals too frequently resulted in a higher level force than necessary; (2) Portland police employed Tasers more times than necessary on such individuals, or in circumstances where such force was not justified; and (3) Portland police used a higher degree of force than justified for low level offenses.

United States v. City of Portland is notable because of its finding persons with mental illness are primary recipients of police use-of-force.

In February 2010 after the killing of Aaron Campbell by Portland police officer Ron Frashour, at the request of an alliance of Black church leaders, Portland city councilor and police commissioner Dan Saltzman asked Senator Ron Wyden for assistance in bringing a Federal civil rights investigation of the Portland Police Bureau. Representative Earl Blumenauer joined Wyden in a letter to the DOJ asking for an investigation.

In a widely publicized press conference June 8, 2011, Assistant U.S. Attorney General Thomas E. Perez announced the launch of an investigation to determine whether the Portland Police Bureau engaged in a pattern or practice of excessive or unnecessary use-of-force in their interactions with persons in a protected class, people with actual or perceived mental health disabilities, and whether such conduct deprived individuals of their rights secured by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

The 18-month-long investigation was prompted by the high number of Portland police officer-involved deaths that involved individuals with mental illness, including Kendra James, James Jahar Perez, James Chasse, Raymond Gwerder, Keaton Otis, Jack Dale Collins, Aaron Campbell, Darryel Ferguson, Thomas Higginbotham, and Brad Morgan.

On September 13, 2012, DOJ issued a Findings Letter with the results of the investigation, stating investigators found reasonable cause to believe Portland police had engaged in unconstitutional conduct. The letter identified serious deficiencies in policy, training, and officer accountability measures that substantially contributed to the unconstitutional conduct by police. That same day, DOJ and the City of Portland released a joint statement declaring the parties' mutual intent to reach a negotiated settlement agreement to resolve these issues.

On October 13, 2012, in a joint press conference, the DOJ and the City of Portland announced a settlement had been reached. On November 15, 2012, Portland City Council unanimously approved the settlement agreement. On November 27, 2012, Portland City Council approved a new tax on service providers of telephone land-lines to pay for police reforms. On December 17, 2012 — the same date the complaint was filed —the parties filed a joint motion to enter a settlement agreement and conditionally dismiss the action, subject to the Court retaining jurisdiction to enforce the agreement.

The proposed settlement agreement includes detailed provisions addressing Portland Police Bureau policies and practices regarding: (1) use of force; (2) dealing with persons perceived as or actually suffering from mental illness or mental health crises; (3) dealing with persons suffering from addictions and mental health challenges; (4) crisis intervention; (5) identifying at-risk employees; (6) officer accountability; (7) training; (8) supervision; (9) misconduct complaint intake, investigation, and adjudication; (10) transparency and oversight; and (11) community engagement. The proposed settlement agreement also includes provisions regarding the implementation and enforcement of its terms.

On December 18, 2012, the Portland Police Association, the labor union representing officers of the Portland Police Bureau, filed a motion to intervene. On January 8, 2013, the Albina Ministerial Alliance Coalition for Justice and Police Reform also moved to intervene.

Both interveners asked to participate in any negotiations of the proposed settlement agreement. On February 19, 2013, the Judge Michael H. Simon fully granted the Portland Police Association's motion, and granted the Albina Ministerial Alliance Coalition for Justice and Police Reform "enhanced amicus status for remedy purposes." Ultimately, both parties were allowed to participate in the settlement negotiations. In 2018 The Mental Health Alliance was joined as an amicus intervenor.

Sign in to keep reading

4 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Psychology