By Rachael Meixensperger, ACLU of Wisconsin intern

In August 2020, Officer Rusten Sheskey of the Kenosha Police Department shot Jacob Blake, a Black man, seven times at close-range, paralyzing him, as Blake was walking away from Sheskey toward a vehicle where his two young children sat. This act of police brutality and excessive force demonstrates the continuation of trauma and violence against people of color in Kenosha and the country as a whole. In the wake of the murder of George Floyd, this shooting sent shockwaves throughout the community and prompted protests that called for police accountability, including an NBA playoff protest led by the Milwaukee Bucks.

Despite the response of the community, Officer Sheskey returned to work on March 31, 2021. Sheskey was not charged or subject to discipline. When questioned about this, Chief Daniel Miskinis stated that an outside agency was in charge of the investigation that found Sheskey acted within the law. There were no body cameras on the officers during the shooting. This event, and countless others like it, demonstrate the urgent need for discussion and action surrounding the lack of accountability for law enforcement officers. 

Black people have undergone police violence throughout history. For young men of color, police violence is a leading cause of death. Black people are 3 times more likely to be killed by police, and 1.3 times more likely to be unarmed than white people. Police have killed people of color at alarming rates in the United States and must be held accountable for their actions. 

Many tactics are currently used to ensure police officers are not held accountable. First, police departments often work closely with prosecutors, which places pressure on prosecutors to comply with officers. Questioning officers creates tension and a reluctance from prosecutors to critically investigate officers. 

Second, contractual and legislative protections, including the bargaining power of police unions, work to protect and defend officers in case of any wrongdoing. For example, union-mandated appeals often reinstate police officers who have been fired. ‘Purge clauses,” after two to five years, require the removal of officers' disciplinary action records. This can make it more difficult to recognize possible patterns of misconduct. 

Another tactic used is qualified immunity. Qualified immunity protects police officers from being held accountable unless they violated a clearly established constitutional right. All of these tactics used in tandem protect police officers, even in the case of wrongdoing. 

Systemic racism and police violence harm communities of color. The American Public Health Association has named police violence as a public health issue and indicates that the following actions that must be taken: 

• implement accountability measures for law enforcement officials
• eliminate formal and informal policies and practices that enable continued violence against populations of color
•  invest in communities of color, and document contact, injuries, and police violence.

These recommendations aim to build and heal communities of color through police accountability.

The continuation of police violence targeting people of color must end. Policies and practices that protect police officers even in the case of wrongdoing must be abolished. We must instead prioritize investing in communities of color to promote healing and growth. 

By: Wil Steebs. Wil is an intern with the ACLU of Wisconsin.

A growing body of research has made it clear: most of our brains are not fully developed until age 25. In fact, the brains of adults and teens work differently; adults tend to think with their prefrontal cortex, the region associated with rational thinking and decision-making, whereas teens tend to think with their amygdala, the region associated with emotion. In teenage brains, the connections between the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex are still developing, which inhibits teens’ decision-making ability.

In spite of this research, the legal definition of adulthood remains the same: once you reach 18 years of age, you may be tried in a Wisconsin court of law as an adult, even if your brain is not fully developed (and by all accounts, it won’t be). 18-year-olds are not capable of the same degree of rational thinking and careful decision making as fully fledged adults, but in the eyes of the law, they are indistinguishable. This is true in most states, but some are even worse: Wisconsin has the dubious distinction of being one of only three states whose criminal justice system still tries 17-year-olds as adults. Since 2011, eleven states have passed legislation raising the age, but Wisconsin, Georgia, and Texas continue to lag behind.

Why does this matter? Well, for starters, young people in adult correctional facilities are in far more danger than they would be in juvenile ones. The statistics are truly sobering. Children housed in adult jails or prisons are nine times more likely to commit suicide than their conterparts in juvenile facilities. They are five times more likely to be sexually assaulted. They are thirty-four times more likely to recidivate. 

The adult system is not equipped to meet the needs of young people. The carceral philosophy behind the adult criminal justice system is a punitive one, its function being more retributive than rehabilitative. While this is a flaw with our justice system in itself, when you couple this dehumanizing philosophy with the incarceration of vulnerable youth, it becomes a recipe for disaster. 

And a disaster it is. Wisconsin has the second highest Black-white incarceration disparity in the nation. Studies have shown that youth of color are disproportionately affected by the automatic transfer of young people into the adult correctional system. Furthermore, according to Kids Forward, a statewide policy advocacy organization, Black and Native American Children “more likely to face conviction in adult court, especially for drug-related crimes.” 

According to the National Institute of Justice, “Increasing the severity of punishment does little to deter crime.” Locking up young people does not result in meaningful harm reduction; it results in meaningful harm. The Supreme Court has ruled in several instances that youth are less responsible than adults for their actions and are more capable of rehabilitation (Roper v. Simmons, Graham v. Florida, J.D.B. v. North Carolina, Miller v. Alabama, Montgomery v. Louisiana). Transitioning from a carceral approach to restorative justice has proven useful in California, and research has shown that restorative justice reduces recidivism among youth. It’s time for Wisconsin to take a similar stand; locking children up will not help them, but addressing the root causes of their issues will.