An Update on States’ Efforts to Regain Control of Local Law Enforcement 

Public entities in both state and local governments across the country have been impacted by the shifting landscape of law enforcement liability. As insurance programs must evolve to address changing risks, Alliant is here to support our clients with broking and consulting services. Here we provide an update on efforts to transition law enforcement authority in some states. 

The Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution allows for decentralized law enforcement across the country by setting boundaries for the federal government and delegating specific powers to states. 

Many states operate by enabling local jurisdictions at the city and county levels to manage their own law enforcement departments, while also having some overlap with state agencies operating separately and independently. 

Crime at the local level has impacted how state governments view local police departments, resulting in a push by state lawmakers to make structural changes to law enforcement activities within their jurisdictions, removing control from the local government and creating a more centralized law enforcement structure at the state level. The number of police excessive force cases has shifted public perception of law enforcement and increased scrutiny of law enforcement personnel.

If state officials do not feel crime is being effectively addressed within the local jurisdiction, or a city is not being held accountable for issues involving its department, they may seek stronger state control to implement reform. At the state level, there are often more resources available to conduct investigations and enforce the law at the local level while upholding the morals of the police department.

Municipal officials in many jurisdictions have been allocating funding to where they believe dollars would be better spent. In some cases, the resulting effect is a decrease in funds, reallocating of funds, or a complete defunding of law enforcement at departments across the country. Many have argued that a reduction in funds leads to a decrease in resources available to respond to crime or prevention services. This lack of funding may equate to a reduction in police officers and training programs provided, as well as equipment used in law enforcement activities, creating a perfect storm for an inadequate or inefficient department and increased crime within the local jurisdiction. Some state lawmakers believe creating a state-sponsored, centralized force would increase state control over how funds are spent and how law enforcement is conducted, ensuring a more consistent response across the entire state. 

Political factors also come into play as agendas change at the local, state and federal level, and states seek greater authority and influence. Two years ago, officials across the country aligned themselves with protesters demanding police be reined in. Seattle was one of the first cities to introduce partial defunding. While initially announcing a planned 20% reduction, the city’s council members pushed for a 50% decrease. Ultimately, the 2021 budget was 10% lower than 2020’s budget. In another example, Austin, TX, leaders cut the police budget by 30% in 2021.

Now, mayors of many of the nation’s largest cities are reversing course and leading calls for a tougher stance on crime. In 2023, several states have already started passing bills that impact local policing. Missouri’s Legislature passed a bill for a state takeover of St. Louis police. Other states are also making moves to take control of police, prosecutors or courts. Florida, Georgia and Texas have all passed bills blocking localities from cutting police budgets by more than a few percent, with the Texas governor championing the idea of the Texas Department of Public Safety taking over the City of Austin Police Department. The Mississippi Senate approved a bill giving state police the authority to patrol throughout the city of Jackson, as well as giving state courts a say in determining the outcome of some local cases. 

According to the National League of Cities, states can support—not preempt—local police reform efforts by leading or working with recommendations from the municipal level. Rhode Island and Utah are examples of states that have worked to create policy changes across local, state and federal levels that are both effective and reflective of the communities they serve. 

“There’s something to be said about the people who live in a particular area picking the people who are responsible for enforcing the law in those areas,” says Andrew Sidman, a political scientist at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. 

There is ample opportunity for states and cities to work together to address systemic issues.

Alliant is here to serve our state and local government clients. If you have questions or would like additional information, please reach out to your Alliant representative.