EXPOSED: Maryland League of Women Voters – “Nonpartisan” Positions? Think Again!

0
277

By: Marc King

In a recent email announcing their upcoming “Winter Workshop” The Maryland League of Woman Voters, a nonpartisan organization by their own account has made it their objective to address five legislative reforms regarding Police Accountability across the State of Maryland. An examination of their proposed reforms and the organizations that they are working with regarding this proposal clearly show a far-left Socialist Democrat agenda and should be very carefully considered by those members of the organization who count themselves as “moderate Democrats or Center Right Republicans. Let us examine what is being proposed….

Five Legislative Reforms for Police Accountability

LWVMD has joined the Maryland Coalition for Justice and Police Accountability along with 100 organizations calling for five changes to Maryland Law that would dramatically impact fairness in policing:

1) Allow investigations into all police misconduct to be disclosed under the Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA).

Let us begin by understanding the Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA). Here is what the Attorney General of Maryland says: The Maryland Public Information Act – The public’s right to information about government activities lies at the heart of a democratic government. Maryland’s Public Information Act (PIA) grants the people of this State a broad right of access to public records while protecting legitimate governmental interests and the privacy rights of individual citizens.
Last time we checked police officers were citizens and deserve to have their privacy rights protected. In todays social media world an officer can be doxed, have his or her family threatened or intimidated before any conclusion regarding alleged misconduct can be determined… That’s just not how America is supposed to work and even our left leaning Maryland AG knows that.

2) Create statutory limits on the use of force by law enforcement.

The Congressional Research Office, a true nonpartisan government entity, provides relevant insight into this issue when it says…”… the Fourth Amendment protects the “right to be free from the use of excessive force in the course of an arrest.” At the same time, according to the Court, the lawful powers of a police officer “necessarily” include “the right to use some degree of physical coercion or threat thereof[.]” As a result, the permissibility of an officer’s use of force in a given situation is governed by an amorphous “reasonableness” standard, which “is not capable of precise definition or mechanical application.” Rather, the Court has said that assessing whether a use of force is “reasonable” requires balancing “the nature and quality of the intrusion on the individual’s Fourth Amendment interests against the importance of the governmental interests alleged to justify the intrusion,” which will depend on “the facts and circumstances of each particular case[.]” https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/LSB10516.pdf

So, we see that the courts cannot put a definition to the act of “reasonable force” so just how can we expect the Maryland Legislature to make such a determination — Answer: We Can’t!

3) Repeal the Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights (LEOBR).

If you want to ensure that you are never able to recruit qualified candidates to fulfill the role of law enforcement officer in your city or town repeal the Law Enforcement Officers Bill of Rights!

“The Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights (LEOBR or LEOBoR) is intended to protect American law enforcement personnel from investigation and prosecution arising from conduct during official performance of their duties and provides them with privileges based on due process additional to those normally provided to other citizens. It was first set forth in 1974, following Supreme Court rulings in the cases of Garrity v. New Jersey (1967) and Gardner v. Broderick (1968). It doesn’t prohibit police departments from subjecting officers to drug tests.”

It is easy to criticize the LEOBR, it appears to shield an officer from wrongdoing but look carefully at the words… provides them with privileges based on due process additional to those normally provided to other citizens… Based on due process… Intellectual honesty leads us to understand that the duties performed by a sworn law enforcement officer are not the duties performed by normal citizens. As such the courts have ruled that a law enforcement offer is permitted additional leeway in determining the character and performance of his duties. There are 10 specific things that the LEOBR provides. Here are the ones that appear to be the most important:

  • Law enforcement officers under investigation are entitled to have counsel or any other individual of their choice present at the interrogation.
  • Law enforcement officers cannot be threatened, harassed, or promised rewards to induce the answering of any question.
  • Law enforcement officers are entitled to a hearing, with notification in advance of the date, access to transcripts, and other relevant documents and evidence generated by the hearing and to representation by counsel or another non-attorney representative at the hearing.

Any “Right”-thinking American can immediately see the need to provide these protections to a law enforcement officer – Any “Left”-thinking American wants to do away with all protections and this should be a matter of great concern to all fair-minded Americans. It is not a blanket immunity, it just ensures due process. Tweak it — but do not eliminate it.

4) Give the people of Baltimore City the ability to govern the Baltimore City Police Department.

Now I must believe that this one was thrown in here just for laughs. Taken literally… Does this mean that every person in Baltimore must be contacted when there is an issue regarding a police matter…? Do we need to go to the poles every Tuesday to reconcile the city police blotter…? Really? Any good leader knows that a complex organization can only function with a clear “Chain of Command” with a leader at the top of the Chain. In Baltimore City this chain starts with the Mayor who allocates authority to the Chief of Police… others like the City Council and the City’s Attorney have been known to inject themselves into the action… So, if you don’t like the way the City Police in Baltimore are governed… change should start with the Mayor and maybe political parties… not the state legislature.

5) Take law enforcement out of schools

Before we legislate law enforcement out of schools — perhaps we should look back and understand why law enforcement was in the schools to begin with.

“Proponents of police in schools argue that police create safe spaces for students to learn and deter students from crime and other problematic behavior. … In every state, high school students are more likely than middle and elementary school students to attend a school with at least one police officer”.

Now critics argue that… “police in schools do little to deter crime and can criminalize students for behavioral issues that police are ill equipped to address”.

So, there are clearly two sides to this issue but the LWV has chosen to offer only one position – “Take Law Enforcement out of Schools.” No debate and no discussion regarding the value of having an armed officer in the school. If they are in fact a deterrent to more sinister things and they are removed — someone needs to be accountable – so be sure to legislate that into the solution.

In conclusion this discussion started with the positions taken by LWV who claim to be nonpartisan on their website but are clearly a left-wing arm of the Socialist Democrats. As further evidence of that claim I offer you the panelists for this Winter Workshop:

  • Senator Jill Carter (D-Baltimore City)
  • Baltimore City Delegate Erik Barron, Democrat
  • Prince George’s County Yanet Amanuel Public Policy Advocate ACLU of Maryland

These are not bad people — just all likeminded and not everyone in the State of Maryland agrees with their positions. It sems that a nonpartisan well intentioned political activist organization that prides itself on looking to help women voters might just consider a person from the Right to debate these important issues. After all, “Diversity Is Our Strength” That should include political diversity as well.

Note from the editor, Troy Smith: Marc knocks it out of the park. Leftist regimes peddle their narrative on the ideals of inclusiveness and love. Their true intentions couldn’t be further from inclusiveness and love. I want to thank Marc for his continued contributions to our site!

Please share and spread the word, the truth is at LaunchLiberty.com!

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here