ACLU of Louisiana’s Justice Lab Sues City of Eunice, Police Chief After Whistleblower Exposes Corruption Within Police Department
Lieutenant Michael Dunn says department used excessive force, ignored medical needs of incarcerated people
NEW ORLEANS – The American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana, alongside Sidley Austin LLP, against the City of Eunice, Louisiana, its Chief of Police, and additional employees of the Eunice Police Department on behalf of employee Lieutenant Michael Dunn. Through the lawsuit, Lt. Dunn blows the whistle on pervasive misconduct and corruption within the Eunice Police Department, including excessive use of force, neglect of inmate medical needs, mishandling of evidence, and misuse of funds—which the department refused to address.
The lawsuit claims that Lt. Dunn notified state, local, and federal officials about the misconduct he witnessed, informing authorities that Eunice Chief of Police Randy Fontenot selectively enforces the law—protecting friends, family members, and political allies from criminal charges, and turning a blind eye to favored officers’ misconduct. It also alleges that Fontenot weaponizes the disciplinary process against employees of the department who are not on his “good side” or refuse to do his bidding.
“As we’ve seen in so many incidents of police violence nationally and locally, law enforcement officers exploit the public’s trust by using their power to protect dangerous officers rather than to protect the public,” said ACLU of Louisiana Executive Director Alanah Odoms. “Indeed, the Eunice Police Department’s deleterious practices under Chief Fontenot are akin to the types of unconstitutional and dangerous policing that should be subject to intense scrutiny at the state and national level, yet they remain hidden and shrouded in secrecy. What is clear is that a culture of corruption persists wherein reports of police misconduct are suppressed and employees who report illegal activity are punished. This is anathema constitutional policing. We demand a thorough investigation of the corruption in this department—our elected officials have a constitutional and ethical responsibility to investigate police misconduct and to hold those individuals accountable who’ve violated the public’s trust.”
After nearly a decade at the Eunice Police Department, Lt. Dunn felt that the system he believed in was breaking down and moved forward with alerting authorities to the department’s misconduct. When Chief Fontenot learned that Dunn wouldn’t remain silent, he and other officers retaliated against him. Among other punishments, Fontenot reduced Dunn’s hours and compensation while spreading lies about Dunn within the department and community, including enlisting an individual facing criminal charges to falsely claim that Lt. Dunn bribed him. Dunn has been threatened with bodily harm and targeted with baseless and pretextual disciplinary action in an effort to force his resignation.
“This is the twelfth case we’ve filed as part of our Justice Lab campaign, and every case has one thing in common: a person brave enough to come forward and call out police abuse and misconduct when they see it or experience it firsthand,” said ACLU of Louisiana Legal Director Nora Ahmed. “Transparency is vital to American democracy, and we’re grateful to Lt. Dunn for bringing these hidden truths to light. Without him, the people of Eunice—and our entire state for that matter—would be unaware of the corruption at the core of this department and the unconstitutional and illegal police practices that have gone undisciplined and uncorrected for far too long.”
“There is, inherent in these unlawful retaliatory actions, a reckless disregard for the constitutional rights of Lt. Dunn and other employees who dare speak out about matters of public concern. And it is time to end that now.”
Lt. Dunn is seeking redress for violations of his First Amendment right to speak on matters of public concern, Louisiana’s Whistleblower Statute, and the Constitution of the State of Louisiana. He also seeks injunctive relief for defamation, civil conspiracy, false light invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. His lawsuit seeks to correct policy failures of the Eunice Police Department and the City of Eunice.
The ACLU of Louisiana continues to encourage anyone who has been the victim of police misconduct to . Filing a complaint is simple and confidential.
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
Prisoners' Rights
Criminal Law Reform
ACLU Sues Bureau of Prisons for Keeping People in Prison Longer Than the Law AllowsACLU Sues Bureau of Prisons for Keeping People in Prison Longer Than the Law Allows
WASHINGTON – A federal lawsuit brought today by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of D.C., and Jenner & Block LLP challenges the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) for unlawfully incarcerating people longer than the law allows under the First Step Act. The lawsuit contends that the BOP’s failure to implement the First Step Act according to its plain language violates the rights of thousands of people who should be returning to their communities and rebuilding their lives but instead remain incarcerated. Signed into law in 2018 by then-President Donald Trump, the bipartisan First Step Act was designed to reduce the population in federal prisons, reform extreme sentencing laws, and provide programming and reentry transition services to people in prison. Central to the First Step Act is a system of earned time credits, which allows people in prison to earn time off their sentences and time out of prison by participating in rehabilitation programs. Through the First Step Act, Congress unambiguously ordered BOP to move people out of prison when they meet certain requirements to use their earned time credits. Instead of faithfully following the mandatory law, BOP adopted a regulation treating the law as optional. As a result, thousands of people, who should already be back in their communities and with their families, remain in prison. “Every extra unlawful day our clients spend in prison is a serious injustice,” said Emma Andersson, deputy director of the Criminal Law Reform Project at the ACLU. “It is egregious that the Bureau of Prisons is imprisoning people for months longer than the law allows. The government must follow through on its legal obligation to get people out of prison on time and back into their communities, where they belong.” Additional comments below from: Vanessa Crowe, plaintiff: “Time is what I owed for my wrongdoing, and I have paid my time. But I should not have to spend more time in prison than the law allows. I often reflect on what I will miss during the months after when I should be out of prison. I will miss work and lose out on wages that would help me get back on my feet. I could be a tax paying citizen instead of a burden on society. But most of all, I will miss more precious time with my family. My family and I are ready to tum the page on this period in our lives — we are all ready to start a new life, a life with purpose, hope, and healing together. I want to start that life when I am legally entitled to start it-not five months later.” Arthur Spitzer, senior counsel at ACLU of D.C.: “There’s no excuse for the Bureau of Prisons to pretend not to understand Congress’s clear command that people who have earned the right to early release must be released. This law has been on the books for six years. The Bureau of Prisons has had plenty of time to understand it. Law enforcers should obey the law.” Betsy Henthorne, partner at Jenner & Block: “It has been six years since the First Step Act was signed, but despite Congress’s clear directives, the Bureau of Prisons continues to hold thousands of people in prison longer than the law allows. We should and do expect better—it’s past time for the BOP to ensure that those who have earned their release are able to return home to their families and communities according to the law Congress passed.” -
Maryland Supreme CourtDec 2024
Criminal Law Reform
Roland Branch v. State of MarylandRoland Branch v. State of Maryland
This petition to the Supreme Court of Maryland asked the court to reconsider its adherence to Whren v. U.S., 517 U.S. 806 (1996), which declared that a traffic stop undertaken for pretextual reasons does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution so long as the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation occurred. The ACLU, alongside the ACLU of Maryland, filed an amicus brief in support of the defendant’s petition, in which the ACLU argued that the court should take up the question of whether pretextual stops violate the Maryland Constitution. In September 2024, the Court denied the petition. -
North Carolina Supreme CourtDec 2024
Criminal Law Reform
State v. WrightState v. Wright
This case in the North Carolina Supreme Court involves the question of whether the police violated the U.S. Constitution when they searched the defendant, Mr. Wright’s, backpack even after he repeatedly said no to the search requests. The ACLU alongside the ACLU of North Carolina filed an amicus brief arguing that the search was unconstitutional because Mr. Wright’s eventual “consent” was the result of police coercion. Our brief urges the court to consider the totality of the circumstances that make one more susceptible to coercion, including race and poverty. -
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Criminal Law Reform
Disability Rights
Incarceration Should Not be a Death Sentence for Individuals Who Use OpioidsIncarceration Should Not be a Death Sentence for Individuals Who Use Opioids
New litigation centered on increasing access to substance-use disorder treatment in jails and prisons is helping to reduce mortality rates among incarcerated individuals.