Current D.C. law on disorderly conduct (section 22-1307 & 1321) is confusing, overbroad, frequently used by police to harass disfavored individuals and violates constitutional rights of free speech, assembly and petition.  Councilmember Phil Mendelson, Chair of the Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary, has proposed a modernization of disorderly conduct law to address these problems in his Bill 18-151.  The ACLU-NCA supports the disorderly conduct changes.

At the Committee's May 18, 2009 hearing, the U.S. Attorney's Office made certain unfounded--absurd, really--charges against the Mendelson bill and supported the status quo, leaving the current law with all its well-established problems in effect.  On May 27, the ACLU-NCA supplied the Committee with a latter rebutting the claims by the US Attorney's Office and reiterating the ACLU's support for the disorderly conduct changes.  

As the ACLU-NCA has often noted, effective policing is very tough work; it requires the active cooperation of victims, witnesses and other residents.  To get that cooperation, the police must earn the respect of the people.  Residents must believe that officers will generally do the right thing.  

When it acted to preserve the disorderly status quo, with all its problems for years, the US Attorney's Office actedin effect to encourage and enable errant police officers to harass individuals, destroying community respect and cooperation, and thereby interfering with bona fide crime-fighting and making the work of the majority of police officers more difficult. This is not the first time that the ACLU has noted similar actions by the Office.  However we detect a pptential ray of hope:  The US Attorney's Office has publicly stated that it is commited, as a priiority, to reforming the disorderly conduct law in D.C.  The ACLU has pledged to Chairman Mendelson our cooperation in any genuine reform effort.  (Of course, we have also seen other situations where a promise of reform has been only a snare to forestall or otherwise limit meaningful change.)

Councilmember Mendelson's updating of the disorderly conduct statutes both helps combat crime and protects people's rights.  Instead of sacrificing crime-fighting and individual rights just to preserve the "flexibility" of an individual officer to enage in police abuse--the situation under current D.C. law, we hope the US Attorney's Office under the Obama Administration and the Holder Jusitce Department will reconsider its opposition to change and reform.  Or perhaps the US Attorney's Office is ignorant of how widespread in the community is the sense that some police routinely harass disfavored individuals?  We would like nothing better than to report to the residents of the District that their US Attorney's Office has abandoned delaying tactics--like the Office's bogus May 18th objections--and now aims to protect residents against police abuse as well as safeguarding residents from genuine disorderly conduct. 

You can see a PDF copy of the ACLU May 27 letter on disorderly conduct here.