Hospital Security Department Policy: Powers, Rights & Liability

Introduction

Hospitals have many unique security needs and legal obligations as highly public, accessible institutions providing essential public goods. Because of the precarious condition of many local and state governments, law enforcement agencies are often unable to meet the numerous and unpredictable security needs of a large hospital environment. State legislatures have responded to these unmet security needs by granting police power to private security officers in varying degrees, from limited apprehension powers to full police powers. Although this trend in the expansion of police power provides hospitals with more flexibility in meeting security objectives, it also brings increased legal risks. These risks result from the hospital's assumption of constitutional limitations on the exercise of police power, as well as exposure to private civil and criminal legal actions.

When a security officer has not been granted police or arrest powers, individuals may not invoke constitutional protections against illegal search and seizure. Instead, such an officer is legally treated as a private citizen, which exposes the officer to civil actions in the form of tort liability as well as criminal liability for offenses such as assault or false imprisonment.

Arrests and Liability Without Police Powers

The liability of private security officers and the hospitals employing them can vary greatly from state to state. State courts are generally responsible for developing tort law through the doctrine of stare decisis, while state legislatures create the relevant criminal statutes.

Hospitals are typically vicariously liable for torts committed by their employees under the doctrine of Respondeat Superior, and most courts would treat private security officers as employees of the hospital. However, depending on the state, courts may classify private security officers as independent contractors. In such cases, hospitals could avoid liability for the torts of their security officers, provided the hospital does not specifically control the methods by which those contractors execute their duties.

Individuals may also bring other constitutional complaints against private security officers, including Substantive Due Process and Equal Protection rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. State constitutions may additionally contain special protections — for example, on parental rights or end-of-life decisions — that could be interfered with by private security personnel.

A private security officer can incur the legal liabilities faced by traditional public police officers if they are granted police power by the appropriate government agency. Such officers receive the full police powers enjoyed by traditional public officers, including the authority to search, detain, and arrest individuals whom the officer has probable cause to suspect of committing a crime.

Security Officers Granted Police and Arrest Powers

In exercising these powers, private security officers could potentially violate the complex and ever-evolving search and seizure rules contained in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, opening the hospital to liability for constitutional violations — including violations of individuals' constitutional right to privacy.

It is generally state legislatures that hold the authority to grant police power to private security officers. As of now, most state legislatures that grant such power limit the officer's jurisdiction to the private property of their employer. Some states extend jurisdiction to streets in close proximity to the employer's location (Goldstein, 2007).

Government Agencies Granting Police Power

State administrative agencies such as Departments of Justice also possess authority over the grant and exercise of police power to private security officers. There are a number of exceptions, obligations, and requirements attached to such grants, depending on the state. For example, in North Carolina, the state Department of Justice requires company police officers to undergo the same basic training as public officers. In Virginia, the Department of Criminal Justice Services trains and certifies "Private Crime Prevention Practitioners" and has plans to send security companies notifications of unclassified homeland security threats and crime alerts.

Local police departments also place certain limits and enhancements on the police power exercised by private security officers through their ongoing cooperation. Many states, such as Virginia, are training private security officers to ensure smooth coordination between security companies and local police and sheriff's departments. In Washington, D.C., the municipal police department requires private security officers to be licensed as "special police" officers in order to legally search or arrest individuals. Cooperation can reach significant proportions, as in the case of the Minneapolis Police Department's "SafeZone" program, which placed private security officers downtown who now outnumber Minneapolis Police Department officers in that area by 13 to 1.