- by BriAnne Lynn
The University of Chicago Police Department (UCPD) is a privately funded police department that has the full powers of a publicly funded force, and is one of the largest private police forces in the country. The UCPD covers an area of 6.5 square miles that house 65,000 people. A large portion of the 65,000 aren’t affiliated with the university, and yet they are still subject to being policed by the UCPD. Students are asking that the force become more transparent, with information available similar to the level that the Freedom of Information Act makes public police records available. This is due to past complaints of racial profiling from the UCPD. There have been cases where black students were specifically targeted over white students and where they were treated with excessive force and suspicion. Students are also asking for the formal police strategies of the UCPD to be made public, to determine what exactly the policing strategy is towards people of color, as well as making it easier to file a formal complaint. It is not legally necessary for this department to makes these changes, as they are a private police force, and therefore are not subject to the same rules as a public police force.
The most interesting thing about the UCPD is that they have the authority and jurisdiction to police members of the community who are not associated with the university. This goes to show the blurring of the lines between what is private space and what is public. If one is off campus, and not affiliated with the university in any way, is it reasonable to still be subject to their private police force? If the answer to that is yes, then to what extent can it be expected that that private police force’s information be made available in the same way public information is available, especially if the individual being policed is not a member of the private institution? In this case, it is a good thing that students are raising this issue, as it is something that should be addressed.
Going beyond this issue of the petition, we should question just what kind of powers the UCPD holds over private citizens. Is this police force regulated by the market much like corporate police forces are, or is it regulated by constitutional standards that the public police forces must hold to? It can be argued that all private police forces must be held accountable to Constitutional standards. I think this is especially important when the private police force is interacting with individuals not associated with their institution, such as a large portion of the population the UCPD polices. Unlike students or employees of the university, residents who just happen to reside in the UCPD jurisdiction can’t easily escape, and are therefore under the scrutiny of this private police force that does not have to take into account their constitutional rights. This is something that is deeply problematic, and needs to be addressed beyond the petition the students have issued.
Source:
http://hpherald.com/2014/03/12/students-seek-to-further-regulate-u-of-c-police/
BriAnne,
ReplyDeleteYour excellent post makes me relate it to the idea of the privacy paradigm. In your context, the two distinct spheres are private and public policing in the Chicago neighborhood. In addition, the extension of the concept addresses the issue of the jurisdiction of the two spheres of policing. The depiction of the UoC police department can be a private police force that extends its surveillance and intrudes upon the neighboring public communities. In comparison to the public police law enforcement, it embodies own sets of rules and legal procedures. The clash between the two surveillance shows a problematic situation because the question about the legitimacy behind the enforcements of disturbances undermine the effectiveness of the two police force. In addition, the concept of privacy paradigm conveys the idea of a tradeoff that involves the people who are governed and the public system. In this case, who is the public system, the public police officers or the UoC PD?
-Jiajun (Michael) Huang.
In this case, I wonder how the jurisdiction if the UCPD is determined. For example, the university can own more land than what one may consider to be "main campus." In that case it is perfectly legal for the UCPD to police anyone who steps onto this private property, whether they are affiliated with the school or not. I am conflicted about the UCPD policing people who own their own homes or rent apartments in the jurisdiction, though. A plus side is that should the people need police assistance, UCPD may be able to respond faster than the local public law enforcement. But I do not think it is fair that these people who are not affiliated with the university could be policed in front of their own homes.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, while I agree that the UCPD should uphold and honor the constitutional rights of everyone that is in their jurisdiction, I'm not sure we should require them to disclose their policing styles because they are a private entity. We don't ask private companies, universities, or security services to tell us their policies for operating their businesses, why should this one public entity be scrutinized any differently?
-Colleen Johnson, Discussion 102
Your blog entry concentrates our attention on the blur between the public and private sectors of policing. Moreover, you develop a clear normative position that argues for holding private police forces to the same standards as public law enforcement, particularly where the private force has jurisdiction beyond the confines of private property.
ReplyDeleteYour blog is really interesting. I agree that students should raise this question and ask to publicize the formal police strategies because that way there is no discrimination against black students involved. Obviously, the police shouldn't reveal their policing styles because that is private but they should treat everyone with equality and not discriminate if they are doing so. Your two main focuses is on private and public policing. I also think that UCPD has the right to police anyone that they think is suspicious and steps foot on the campus because their best interest is in the safety of the students.
ReplyDeleteMandeep Thind
I find this issue to be very interesting, especially the question of if it is reasonable for the non affiliated public to be under the jurisdiction of these private police officers. I would argue that it is not reasonable, due to the fact that private police aren't subject to many of the Constitutional safeguards which prohibit public police from infringing upon our rights. Another reason why I see this expansive private jurisdiction to be so troubling is that some people might not be able to distinguish between the public and private police, which could lead to many complicated problems since they both follow different rules/guidelines. I'm confident that there will be changes in the near future for the private U of C police, especially if they abuse their powers.
ReplyDeleteJonathan Berry-Smith
Interesting post BriAnne! This article brought up some interesting questions. Having discussed a few modes of policing in class, I find the intertwining of the private and public sectors of policing to be quite confusing. As you mentioned in your response, I can understand why students are requesting for the formal policing strategies of the UCPD to be made public however, I am sure this would be fought with by the private sector policing. Further, I found it interesting that due to their status as private, they are not subjected to the same rules are the public sector. Ultimately, it seems like the use of both sectors may encourage violations due to the blurry lines that undoubtedly occur from the blending of the two sectors: such as racial profiling?
ReplyDeleteThere are a lot of issues at hand with the fact that UCPD is given the same type of power as public law enforcement regardless of it being a private actor. It seems problematic that UCPD can police members not affiliated with the campus and not disclose its practices because of the fact that they have in their hands a great level of coercive power. Though they are a private entity, it seems that the proper thing to do is to make them follow the constitutional rights that we hold. Enough violations of our constitutional rights are made by public law enforcement and there is no need to add to that by allowing private law enforcement to follow their own guidelines. If people want to pay a private entity for protection, then they should make sure that they are respecting our constitutional rights.
ReplyDeleteThis post provides a brilliant account of the erasing of borders between the private and public policing in the case of UCPD. It also demonstrates a case similar to the one described by professor Musheno during lectures: the lack of transparency when it comes to the private policing institutions. This matters definitely should be addressed by the academics and should be further discussed by the public (with the students' petition being a good start for it).
ReplyDeleteAlexander Solodovnikov
I enjoyed your post and presentation Bri'Anne . You discussed something that I did not consider when I moved into the City of Berkeley. This is something that can be problematic, like you said, for residents who are not affiliated with the university. However, I agree with Colleen, the university could own land that goes beyond the campus, and in this instance -- it is legal for the UCPD to police these areas. I do agree with you that there has to be transparency on their policing procedures.
ReplyDeleteKevin Ramirez
This post addresses the problem in policing system that we are experiencing nowadays. Now people tend to look for more safety which would require more money and private policig actually response to that needs. They tend to be more prepared since they have more financial support. They are powerful and sometimes more powerful than public policing. There should really be a line that between these two and private police should actully respect punlic policing and follow them. In my opinion, if they don't do that, the citizen could lost faith and respect in public police too.
ReplyDeleteWarinya Rojanasuwan
This post really addresses the problem of private policing. Private law enforcement is allowed to have as much authority as public policing; however, the rights of suspects or offenders are not protected as much as public policing. Since the private police are hired by the university, the role of the police becomes more like surveillance on students instead of keep the order of the campus. As Gilliom mentioned that surveillance creates inequality, the use of private police, whose power is not limited as much as public police, creates new inequality; in fact students do complain about racial discrimination by the private police. This further may will lead to racial discrimination done by school authorities because the private police are hired by the school and they may write report filled with racial discrimination to the school. The abuse of power of private police is really dangerous and difficult to limit. Also, the relationship between the school and the private police may will create a new discrimination.
ReplyDeleteSansui Iwamoto
Good choice of topic! It's a perfect demonstration of modern policing's complexities. I think it would also be interesting to consider the potential similarities and differences between the private law enforcement agencies of public universities as opposed to private universities and whether the private/public aspect has any influence on their respective accountabilities, methods, and/or policies. Another potential perspective to consider is whether other campus police departments share similar policies regarding transparency and if this is a common phenomenon that's been overlooked or just accepted.
ReplyDeleteAnnie Choi
I was surprised by this, I didn't expect there to be so much power given to private police forces. In my experience and knowledge of the way the University of California police do things, they don't do much other than apprehend, deal with educational repercussions, and refer your case to the BPD. While this still leaves much opportunity for profiling and violation of civil rights, they seem like they have less power than the U Chicago PD. I find it troublesome as well, that the U Chicago PD has so much power without being held to the same standards as public police departments, and it doesn't seem right. Those protections are there for a reason, and if there are organizations with as much power as those who have needed to be protected against, those need to be protected against as well.
ReplyDeleteAtli Thorkelsson
I commend you for raising some interesting questions and issues related to the top-down management of private and public policing. They are really interesting especially when you mentioned in your blogpost how students of University of Chicago pressured the UCPD for greater transparency in terms of their police strategies. I believe that it would be difficult for the UCPD to submit a formal strategies because they are not subjected to government funding. They might have more lenient regulation and maybe most of the decisions of these private police agents are based on precedents or their daily experience as a frontline workers. I believe that your post sets the tone for our upcoming discussion about discretionary. Indeed, your topic plays an important role in understanding the decision-making of the frontline workers and how they handle different situations in accordance to administration's policy and work ethics.
ReplyDelete-Vanessa Lei M. Escorpiso (Section 101)
Nice post. I definitely agree that this article illustrates the need for concern over the blurring of the line between private and public policing. However, specifically with this case, I wonder if we cannot think of this occurrence as a matter of jurisdiction. Although many of the citizens who are policed by the UCPD are not university-affiliated, if they lie within a radius that is populated primarily by people with a university affiliation, then the UCPD could be motivated to police the entire region with the interest of ensuring a particular standard of living for the latter. This could be analogized to how persons from outside an area (transient persons, tourists) can similarly be policed in the area that they are visiting.
ReplyDelete-Chey Iwamoto
I was looking at some numbers and it says that there were only 15000 students enrolled at University of Chicago which means over 50,000 people are being policed by the private police. I, am however, interested in knowing what lies in the properties of the university and why lies in the private properties. I recall hearing from someone that People's Park is property of the University of California, but in our cases, it seems that the police force policing that area is actually Berkeley police. Interesting to see the differences of the policing in at our school and at another. Also, I would expect the city of Chicago to have a prevalent police force based on its history, but I guess I need to do more research on that.
ReplyDeleteThanks for bringing up my awareness on an actual scale of how the gap of private and public policing has changed.
-Richard Lin