

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

67 national and local criminal justice, civil rights, human rights, faith-based, immigrants' rights, LGBTQ, and open government organizations urged the Department of Justice (DOJ) to strengthen its proposed rule outlining the process for police departments to collect and report data about people who die while in police custody.
67 national and local criminal justice, civil rights, human rights, faith-based, immigrants' rights, LGBTQ, and open government organizations urged the Department of Justice (DOJ) to strengthen its proposed rule outlining the process for police departments to collect and report data about people who die while in police custody.
In a letter sent yesterday, the organizations responded to DOJ's proposal for implementing the Deaths in Custody Reporting Act (DICRA), which requires police departments across the country to disclose details to the federal government about custodial deaths. DICRA was signed into law in 2014 in response to a troubling lack of reliable data on these deaths and DOJ is currently collecting comments on its implementation proposal that was published August 4, 2016. The comment period will close on October 3, 2016. Signers include The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the ACLU, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the United Methodist Church, the National Immigration Law Center, the National LGBTQ Task Force, the Southern Poverty Law Center, among many others.
In their letter, the organizations list a number of deficiencies in the proposal that are a "departure" from DICRA, including a lack of accountability to ensure state and local police are actually reporting the data; a failure to condition federal funding on adequate reporting; a disturbing reliance on media reports instead of police departments for data; a lack of clarity on how DICRA applies to federal agencies; and the absence of a clear definition of the word "custody."
The groups are especially concerned about the lack of consequences for not reporting accurate data because "voluntary reporting programs on police-community encounters have failed. Only 224 of the more than 18,000 law enforcement agencies reported about 444 fatal police shootings to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in 2014, though we have reason to believe that annual numbers of people killed by police exceeds 1,000."
"The loopholes in these regulations are cavernous," said Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. "You can't fix what you can't measure. Police departments should report deaths in custody when they happen; it should be that simple. But these regulations make it clear that DOJ would rather bend over backwards to accommodate police departments' dysfunction or reluctance. There should be simple procedures so that police can provide complete and accurate data or face clear consequences for non-compliance."
"Relying on news coverage for the data reporting work of departments is especially problematic," Henderson continued. "Newsrooms are shrinking across the country and - now more than ever-- it's the government that should be providing journalists with transparent data, not the other way around."
The groups also want the regulations to include a broader range of potential areas of police misconduct. "To achieve complete and uniform data collection and reporting, the federal government must solicit disaggregated data that is reflective of all police-civilian encounters, including those encounters with people of color, women, and people with disabilities. Data concerning sexual assault and misconduct by law enforcement agents should also be collected and reported," they said.
The letter and a complete list of signers is linked here and pasted below.
--
August 29, 2016
The Honorable Loretta Lynch The Honorable Sallie Yates The Honorable Karol Mason
Attorney General Deputy Attorney General Assistant Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice U.S. Department of Justice U.S. Department of Justice, OJP
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 810 Seventh Street, NW
Washington, DC 20530 Washington, DC 20530 Washington, DC 20531
Re: Proposed Implementation of Deaths In Custody Reporting Act (DICRA)
Dear Attorney General Lynch, Deputy Attorney General Yates, and Assistant Attorney General Mason:
The 67 undersigned national, state, and local criminal justice, civil rights, human rights, faith-based, immigrants' rights, LGBTQ, and open government organizations are writing to express concerns with the proposed implementation of the Deaths In Custody Reporting Act (DICRA). We are also writing to strongly reiterate our request that the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) condition federal criminal justice grants on data collection and reporting on police-civilian encounters.
DICRA was enacted almost two years ago, so guidance on the law's data collection and reporting process is welcomed. However, we have significant concerns with the proposed process published in the Federal Register.[1] Some of the undersigned organizations will submit specific comments by the October 3, 2016 deadline. In the meantime, please consider and address the issues raised below.
First, the proposal is a departure from DICRA provisions that require states receiving federal funding to report deaths in custody to the federal government. The Department of Justice is attempting to shift the data collection and reporting requirements from the states to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) by having BJS collect data on deaths in custody through its Arrest-Related Deaths (ARD) program instead of states. States and law enforcement agencies, the entities closest to the data being sought, should be responsible for collecting and reporting deaths in custody to the federal government as mandated by law.[2] It will be difficult for DOJ to get an accurate picture of trends in custodial deaths if state and local law enforcement agencies are not held accountable for collecting data after a death occurs.
Second, with BJS assuming responsibility for states' data collection and reporting, the proposal indicates that BJS will rely primarily upon publicly available information ("open-source review") for its ARD program.[3] This means that should The Guardian and the Washington Post decide to continue to invest in this research,[4] those news outlets will continue to be the best national sources for data on deaths in police custody. Certain media outlets have been critical to understanding police-civilian encounters over the past year, but it is unlikely that national media attention and resources can remain on policing indefinitely. Thus, relying on media accounts and statistics is an inadequate method of collecting data to determine the circumstances under which people die while in law enforcement custody.
Moreover, the proposal does not indicate how federal law enforcement agencies will comply with DICRA. The law is clear in its application to federal law enforcement including immigration officials, so the guidance must detail how federal agencies, including Customs and Border Protection (CBP), will comply with DICRA. Also, the proposal does not provide a clear definition for the term "custody," particularly instances where a fatal police shooting has occurred without an arrest.
Additionally, the proposal does not discuss penalties for noncompliance. DICRA gives the Attorney General the discretion to subject states that do not report deaths in custody to a ten percent reduction of Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program (Byrne JAG) funds. The financial penalty is critical to successful implementation of DICRA as voluntary reporting programs on police-community encounters have failed. Reportedly, only 224 of the more than 18,000 law enforcement agencies reported approximately 444 fatal police-shootings to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in 2014[5], though we have reason to believe that annual numbers of people killed by police exceeds 1,000.[6]
Finally, we would like to reiterate our ask that the Office of Justice Programs require state and local law enforcement agencies that benefit from Department of Justice federal grants and programs to collect and report data on incidents of police use of force on civilians and other police-civilian encounters, such as pedestrian and traffic stops. The federal government awards close to $4 billion in such grants annually, and any discretionary grant should be conditioned upon providing data.[7]
Any statutory or formula grant, including the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne JAG), should require data reporting as part of its existing performance metrics. To achieve complete and uniform data collection and reporting, the federal government must solicit disaggregated data that is reflective of all police-civilian encounters, including those encounters with people of color, women, youth, and people with disabilities. Data concerning sexual assault and misconduct by law enforcement agents should also be collected and reported.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. We also respectfully request a meeting with you to discuss this matter further.
Sincerely,
AFL-CIO
African American Ministers in Action (AAMIA)
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
American Civil Liberties Union
Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance, AFL-CIO (APALA)
Bend the Arc: A Jewish Partnership for Justice
Bill of Rights Defense Committee/Defending Dissent Foundation
Californians Aware
Call to Do Justice
Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good
Church of Scientology National Affairs Office
Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles
Council on American-Islamic Relations
DC Reentry Task Force
Dignity and Power Now
Disciples Justice Action Network
Equity Matters, Inc.
Equality New Mexico
Fitting the Description
Florida Legal Services
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights
Government Accountability Project
Human Rights Defense Center
Human Rights Watch
Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights
Immigrant Legal Advocacy Project
Immigrant Legal Resource Center
Jewish Council For Public Affairs (JCPA)
Justice Strategies
Kino Border Initiative
Lambda Legal
LatinoJustice PRLDEF
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Metropolitan Community Churches
NAACP
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.
National African American Drug Policy Coalition
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL)
National Association of Social Workers (NASW)
National Council of Jewish Women (NCJW)
National Disability Rights Network (NDRN)
National Immigrant Justice Center
National Immigration Law Center
National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild
National LGBTQ Task Force
No More Deaths/No Mas Muertes
OCA - Asian Pacific American Advocates
OneAmerica
OpenTheGovernment.org
Pangea Legal Services
Prison Policy Initiative
Project South
Reformed Church of Highland Park
Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services (RAICES)
San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium
Society of Professional Journalists
South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT)
Southern Border Communities Coalition
Southern Poverty Law Center
StoptheDrugWar.org
Sunlight Foundation
T'ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights
The United Methodist Church - General Board of Church and Society
Wilco Justice Alliance
cc: Roy Austin, Deputy Assistant, Domestic Policy Council
Vanita Gupta, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division
Sarah Saldana, Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
R. Gil Kerlikowske, Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Denise E. O'Donnell, Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance
William J. Sabol, Director, Bureau of Justice Statistics
[1] Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 150, DOJ, Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection Comments Requested; New Collection: Arrest-Related Deaths Program, Aug. 4, 2016, available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-08-04/pdf/2016-18484.pdf (hereinafter Proposed Collection Comments)
[2] Pub.L. 113-242.
[3] Proposed Collection Comments, supra note 1 at 51490 (stating that the BJS "redesigned methodology includes a standardized mixed method, hybrid approach relying on open sources to identify eligible cases, followed by data requests from law enforcement and medical examiner/coroner offices for incident-specific information about the decedent and circumstances surrounding the event.").
[4] See, e.g., The Guardian, The Counted: People killed by police in the U.S., available at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database.
[5] See Federal Bureau of Investigation: Uniform Crime Reporting, 2014 Crime in the United States, available at https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/expanded-homicide-data/expanded_homicide_data_table_14_justifiable_homicide_by_weapon_law_enforcement_2010-2014.xls
[6] See John Swaine & Oliver Laughland, Eric Garner and Tamir Rice among those missing from FBI record of police killings, The Guardian, Oct. 1, 2015, available at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/15/fbi-record-police-killings-tamir-rice-eric-garner. See also Kimberly Kindy, Marc Fisher, Julie Tate & Jennifer Jenkins, A Year of Reckoning: Police Fatally Shoot Nearly 1,000, Wash. Post, Dec. 26, 2015, available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/12/26/a-year-of-reckoning-police-fatally-shoot-nearly-1000/.
[7] Brennan Center for Justice, Success-Oriented Funding: Reforming Federal Criminal Justice Grants (2014), available at https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/publications/SuccessOrientedFunding_ReformingFederalCriminalJusticeGrants.pdf.
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights is a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 200 national organizations to promote and protect the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States. Through advocacy and outreach to targeted constituencies, The Leadership Conference works toward the goal of a more open and just society - an America as good as its ideals.
(202) 466-3311"We've been warning for weeks that the Trump administration's dangerous, sensationalized operations are a threat to our public safety and that someone was going to get hurt."
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz on Wednesday put his state's National Guard on standby—and the Trump administration on notice—after a federal immigration officer fatally shot a woman in Minneapolis.
Walz, a Democrat who was former Vice President Kamala Harris' running mate in the 2024 election, said during a press conference that he issued a warning order to the Minnesota National Guard, which means troops are preparing for a possible mobilization.
This, after a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer shot and killed a woman later identified by her mother as Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old US citizen and mother of a 6-year-old whose father died in 2023.
Good was killed Wednesday morning while driving a sport utility vehicle in south Minneapolis during heightened ICE operations in the Twin Cities. The US Department of Homeland Security and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said Good was shot in self-defense while committing "an act of domestic terrorism."
President Donald Trump said on his Truth Social network that Good "was very disorderly, obstructing and resisting, who then violently, willfully, and viciously ran over the ICE officer, who seems to have shot her in self defense."
However, bystander video shows Good slowly trying to pull away from federal agents before several gunshots are heard and the SUV crashes. Law enforcement authorities and witnesses said Good was shot in the face and head.
“It’s beyond me that the Homeland Security director already decided who this person was and what their motive was—before they were even removed from the vehicle," Walz said during a press conference, referring to Noem. "We’re not living in a normal world.”
ICE agents also reportedly prevented a physician bystander from attending to the victim.
Turning to the Trump administration and its deadly anti-immigrant crackdown, Walz said, "We've been warning for weeks that the Trump administration's dangerous, sensationalized operations are a threat to our public safety and that someone was going to get hurt."
"What we're seeing is the consequence of governance designed to generate fear, headlines, and conflict. It's governing by reality TV," he continued. "And today that recklessness cost someone their life."
"From here on, I have a very simple message: We do not need any further help from the federal government," Walz added. "To Donald Trump and Kristi Noem: You've done enough."
Walz's comments echoed the frustration of other elected officials in Minnesota, including Democratic Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, who had a blunt message for ICE following Wednesday's shooting: "Get the fuck out of Minneapolis!"
Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)—a member of her state's large Somali American community, which is enduring racist attacks by Trump and his supporters—called Wednesday's shooting "unconscionable and reprehensible" and accused the administration of "unleashing violence" and "terrorizing neighborhoods."
At least hundreds of people took to the streets of Minneapolis to protest Wednesday's killing, gathering at the site of the shooting and at other locations including the Hennepin County Courthouse to demand ICE leave their city. Some protesters hurled snowballs and insults at federal agents.
“Shame! Shame! Shame!” protesters at the scene of the killing chanted loudly from behind police tape. “ICE out of Minnesota!”
"ICE out Now!" they shouted at the courthouse doors.
NOW: Anti-ICE protesters outside of Minneapolis Court House demanding "ICE OUT NOW" after ICE involved shooting in Minnesota pic.twitter.com/gmgT8zFAx0
— Oliya Scootercaster 🛴 (@ScooterCasterNY) January 7, 2026
Additional emergency protests are planned for cities across the nation.
"Today, ICE murdered a woman in Minneapolis. Tonight, we’ll be mourning her and the other lives that have been taken and traumatized by ICE," progressive Illinois congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh said on Bluesky. "I hope to see you there."
"This poses another dangerous threat to free and fair elections in this country, and other Democratic states must act now to ultimately protect a fair and representative democracy," said one national expert.
President Donald Trump's push to rig US congressional maps for Republicans ahead of this year's elections expanded to his home state of Florida on Wednesday, when GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis announced the Legislature will hold a special session in April.
While Trump has openly pressured Republican state leaders to take action—and threatened those who don't—DeSantis tried to frame the plans as an effort to "ensure that Florida's congressional maps accurately reflect the population of our state."
DeSantis also explained during a press conference that he is pushing the session to April 20-24 because of a forthcoming US Supreme Court decision "that's gonna affect the validity of some of these districts nationwide, including some of the districts in the state of Florida."
While the high court's right-wing supermajority last month gave Texas Republicans a green light to use their recently redrawn political map in the midterm elections, DeSantis was referring to the expected ruling on a case about Louisiana's congressional districts that predates Trump's gerrymandering push.
The outcome of Louisiana v. Callais could be "the GOP's best chance of defending its narrow, five-seat majority in the House of Representatives," Bloomberg reported Wednesday. "In oral arguments last fall, the conservative justices appeared poised to significantly limit, if not completely overturn, the provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that bars changes in election laws that have the effect of discriminating against racial minorities."
In a statement, the Florida Democratic Party called DeSantis' map-rigging effort "reckless, partisan, and opportunistic."
"This is nothing more than a desperate attempt to rig the system and silence voters before the 2026 election," the party said. "Now, after gutting representation for Black Floridians just three years ago, Ron is hoping the decimation of the Voting Rights Act by Trump's Supreme Court will allow him to further gerrymander and suppress the vote of millions of Floridians."
Florida Senate Minority Leader Lori Berman (D-31) said that "Florida's Fair Districts Amendment strictly prohibits any maps from being drawn for partisan reasons, and regardless of any bluster from the governor's office, the only reason we're having this unprecedented conversation about drawing new maps is because Donald Trump demanded it."
"An overwhelming majority of Floridians voted in favor of the Fair Districts Amendment and their voices must be respected," Berman declared. "The redistricting process is meant to serve the people, not the politicians."
Florida House Minority Leader Fentrice Driskell (D-67) similarly said during a press briefing that "people should pick their politicians. Politicians should not pick their people. Florida's government should not be rigging elections. That's what they do in places like Cuba and Venezuela, not America. This is a cynical swamp-like behavior that makes people hate politics, and Florida doesn't have to do this, period."
The National Democratic Redistricting Committee, founded and chaired by former Attorney General Eric Holder, also condemned the move. The group's president, John Bisognano, said that "the proclamation that the state should wait for 'guidance' from the US Supreme Court is just a thinly veiled call for Florida Republicans to further gerrymander, no matter the court's decision."
"The Sunshine State is already one of the most egregiously gerrymandered states in the country, with a DeSantis-drawn congressional map that robs millions of voters—particularly voters of color—of their rightful representation," Bisognano noted.
"Right now, Florida Republicans are aiming to enact an even more extreme gerrymander on top of an already extreme gerrymander, not because Floridians want this, but because they want to cater to the DC politicians and special interests and dilute Black and Latino voting power," he added. "This poses another dangerous threat to free and fair elections in this country, and other Democratic states must act now to ultimately protect a fair and representative democracy."
In addition to Texas, Republicans have recently redrawn maps to appease Trump in Missouri and North Carolina—while GOP state senators in Indiana joined Democratic lawmakers to block an effort there.
Voters in California responded by approving new congressional districts for their state that favor Democrats, which swiftly drew a lawsuit from the Trump administration. Democratic lawmakers in Maryland may follow the Golden State's lead.
"When government actions tied to foreign resources are preceded and followed by closed-door meetings with the world’s largest oil companies, transparency is not optional—it is essential."
A legal watchdog group is demanding information about the extent to which the Trump administration planned its attack on Venezuela last weekend with American oil companies, which are expected to profit royally from the takeover of the South American nation's oil reserves.
The group Democracy Forward filed a series of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests on Monday seeking records and information about the role of US oil companies in the planning of the attack, which killed an estimated 75 people and led to the US military's abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife.
President Donald Trump did not inform Congress of the operation, which is required under the War Powers Act of 1973, but he told reporters on Sunday that he'd tipped off oil company executives both "before and after" the strike.
According to reporting by the Wall Street Journal, he informed executives roughly a month before the strike to "get ready" because big changes were coming to the country, which had long held state control over the largest oil reserves in the world.
Since toppling Maduro, in an operation that international law experts have widely described as illegal, Trump has said his goal is to "get the oil flowing" to American oil companies to start "taking a tremendous amount of wealth out of the ground.”
On Tuesday, Trump said Venezuela's interim leaders—who he's threatened with more attacks if they don't do what he says—have agreed to hand over 30-50 million barrels of oil to be sold by the US, which will control how the profits are dispersed.
Trump and several members of his Cabinet, including Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, are expected to meet with oil executives on Friday at the White House to discuss "security guarantees" for their new spoils.
Democracy Forward has requested information about communications between senior officials at the US departments of Energy and the Interior and executives at top oil companies, including Chevron, ExxonMobil, and ConocoPhillips, prior to the attack. This includes emails, attachments, and calendar invitations exchanged since December 2025.
The group has said it will seek to determine whether these companies were given "privileged access or influence" over the administration's policy toward Venezuela.
“The president couldn’t find time to brief members of Congress before kidnapping a foreign head of state, but appears to have prioritized discussions with Big Oil. When government actions tied to foreign resources are preceded and followed by closed-door meetings with the world’s largest oil companies, transparency is not optional—it is essential,” said Skye Perryman, the president and CEO of Democracy Forward. “The public deserves to know what interests are shaping decisions that have enormous consequences for global energy markets and democratic accountability.”
FOIA, which was passed in 1967, allows members of the public to request records from any federal agency. However, agencies have broad discretion to deny FOIA requests, including in cases involving national security or interagency communications.