Analyzing the Consent Decrees

¶ … consent decrees' deal with the issue of police accountability.

Origin of Consent Decree

Consent decrees refer to settlements contained within court orders. Courts ordain the injunctive relief remedy against the accused and consent to maintain their jurisdiction over a case, for ensuring the party/parties follow the settlement.

Injunctive relief represents a court-imposed remedy wherein one of the parties in the case is directed to do something, or refrain from doing it. Disobeying the order might make the court pronounce the given party as being in contempt, leading to the imposition of other penalties.

Complainants in court cases normally prefer the option of consent decrees, as these agreements have the court's power backing them. Further, an accused, wary of publicity, will also usually prefer this sort of agreement, since it limits exposure of details that are injurious to him/her (Consent decree legal definition of consent decree). On the other hand, those who oppose the consent decree option contend that a federal district court can assert unwarranted power over defendants through these agreements. Furthermore, they claim that the federal courts also impose certain conditions on local and state governments in cases falling under the "civil rights" category, which usurp state power.

A majority of civil cases will typically be settled prior to the trial phase, with most settlements being out-of-court agreements among the two parties. Normally, complainants file motions dismissing the case they filed after signing of the settlement. Subsequently, the court will issue an order for case dismissal; thus causing closure of the case. However, if the accused party fails to meet settlement terms, the complainant cannot reactivate the old case. In other words, a new suit has to be filed, and the complainant has to seek ultimate intervention for processing the case. For more complicated civil cases (such as those involving industrial/business conduct), and in case of governmental action against corporations relating to alleged violation of regulatory laws, the consent decree option is often part of settlement agreements (Consent decree legal definition of consent decree). Courts maintain jurisdiction as well as oversee settlements for ensuring properly execution of the terms of settlement. Defendants may be threatened with contempt orders to ensure they refrain from delaying action or trying to circumvent the agreement's intent. Moreover, settlement terms will be public. There are particular kinds of lawsuits that necessitate issuance of consent decrees by courts. In case of class action case settlements, the Federal Rules of Procedure's 23rd Rule requires federal district courts to ascertain if any proposed case settlement is reasonable, fair, and adequate prior to approving it. Courts have to review consent decrees put forward in Justice Department-filed antitrust lawsuits, under the 1974 Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act. The statute instructs courts to review particular items, such as whether or not the decree promotes the interests of the public (Consent decree legal definition of consent decree).

Pattern of Practice

Such cases are usually class action cases wherein complainants try to prove the accused has systematically undertaken discriminatory activities. Further, they endeavor to prove that such involvement in discriminatory actions was especially using procedures and policies. Typically, these cases involve school segregation, employment discrimination, or housing discrimination (Pattern-or-Practice Case Law & Legal Definition). Complainants have to prove that the conduct of the accused affects every day practices or forms a sequence of actions. However, inferences of official or executive complicity can be derived from continuous non-implementation of corrective measures or non-response to complaints.

Court-Ordered Monitor Role

Court-appointed Monitors are tasked with assessing and reporting whether consent decree requirements have been met, and whether or not its execution leads to professional and constitutional treatment of citizens by the NOPD (New Orleans Police Department) (UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA). For completing their responsibility, Monitors have to conduct several assessments, reviews, and audits, including compliance reviews for ascertaining if the NOPD and the City have incorporated consent decree conditions into policy, ensured the conditions are actually met, and trained every relevant staff member as needed. Additionally, other assessments have to be performed for determining the Consent Decree's practical effects on numerous tangible outcomes.

Pittsburgh Consent Decree Agreements

Definitions applicable to the Consent Decree are as follows (In The United States District Court for The Western District of Pennsylvania United States of America):

1. Body cavity search: This term implies all searches that involve internal physical exams or visual inspection of body organs or cavities (e.g., stomach cavity).

1. Complaint history: This implies a brief of every misconduct complaint filed against any given officer since the year 1986, as well as a brief describing the allegations of suits that are filed involving this officer, retained in the computerized early-warning system.

1. Record or Document: These terms are interpreted to encompass recordings and writings as defined under the Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 1001(1).