Page 8 - May 2020

SecondVice President’s Report
COVID checkpoints
Amid the governor’s stay-in-place order as a means to control the spread of coronavirus, the Lodge has received a number of calls from mem- bers who’ve questioned the appropriateness of some supervisors’ COVID checkpoints. It was re- ported that some members have been told, “The ACLU is okay with it.” Regardless of the ACLU’s position, a COVID checkpoint is not a clever crime-fighting strategy and shouldn’t be used as
such because of the constitutionality of it. Furthermore, I’d highly, highly doubt the ACLU would be indemnifying offi- cers in civil litigation. I’m all for fighting crime, but not if it means fighting civil-rights lawsuits.
Now, I’m not a constitutional attorney, nor do I have a law degree, but I’m pretty sure that stopping or altering a per- son’s freedom of movement, without reasonable articulable suspicion or probable cause, is a violation of Department or- ders at a minimum. Even blocking traffic or someone’s path, in certain situations, can be viewed as violating someone’s
First Amendment rights.
Some research has provided event numbers obtained for
COVID-19 awareness. The Department policy states, in part, “An officer may approach any person at any time for any reason on any basis. However, absent reasonable articula- ble suspicion or probable cause, that person must be free to walk away at any time.” It is a concern of some members that other officers will unknowingly violate Department policy to satisfy their supervisors’ orders.
From what we are told, the City has washed its hands of any knowledge or responsibility of these COVID checkpoints and, if that is the case, then certainly some officers would need to rethink being passionate about these type of mis- sions. I’m not advocating for members to disobey supervi- sors’ orders; however, I am advocating for members to know Department policy, the state law (725 ILCS 5/107-14) and the U.S. Constitution alike. Modern-day ambulance-chasing at- torneys have morphed into police-chasing attorneys. We’ve seen it upon the rollout of the I.S.R. program; attorneys tailed officers in an attempt to find clients who’ve had contact with the police. These “COVID awareness” checks could be anoth- er opportunity for attorneys who use this method.
In essence, Article 22 of the contract states that the em- ployer shall provide legal representation in civil action to any officer when the officer is within the scope of their duty. However, many times the Department takes the position to not indemnify officers. The officer’s only contractual re- course is to file a grievance. Furthermore, if an officer was to misinterpret the COVID-19 awareness and was to be indem- nified in civil litigation, punitive damages may not be off the table.
By now, every community in this city has been asked to do its part to slow the spread, but for some, this is just too much to ask. Videos of large gatherings, both indoors and outdoors, have been surfacing on social media. Calls for service at “pop-up” parties all throughout the communities with higher concentration of crime are becoming more fre- quent, just as the number of COVID cases increases.
We have more questions than answers regarding this is- sue. As the governor’s order puts enforcement action on the municipality, one question remains: “How do police enforce the executive order without violating constitutional rights?” Well, it’s proven that merely asking people to do the right thing during this pandemic has not worked in certain seg- ments of society. The reality is, a large number of the civil lawsuits come from these segments of society, not to men- tion the bulk of overall crime. So, the bigger question many officers find themselves asking is, “Why am I jeopardizing my livelihood when some people just refuse to listen?”
DAN GORMAN
8 CHICAGO LODGE 7 ■ MAY 2020