Lawsuit Challenges Unequal Response to Mental Health Emergencies in Washington, DC
WASHINGTON — Bread for the City, a D.C.-based nonprofit supporting underserved communities, filed a federal lawsuit today challenging the District of Columbia’s practice of sending police officers rather than mental health providers to respond to mental health emergencies. Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of D.C., and the law firm of Sheppard Mullin, the community organization alleges that the disparity in how the District responds to physical and mental health emergencies violates the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act.
“Someone who calls 911 for a physical health emergency gets trained medical providers who can treat and stabilize them. But someone who calls 911 for a mental health emergency gets a police officer with handcuffs and a gun,” said Susan Mizner, director of the ACLU’s Disability Rights Program. “More than just illogical and dangerous, D.C.’s emergency response system fails to provide the same level of care for people in mental health crises as for people in physical health crises. This is precisely the type of unequal treatment our disability rights laws are designed to protect against.”
The lawsuit contends that the District discriminates against people with mental health disabilities by failing to ensure that mental health providers, instead of police officers, are available to provide timely responses to mental health emergencies. Metropolitan Police Department officers’ “training and record of performance establishes that their presence [at a mental health emergency] creates a substantial risk that they will provide ineffective services and, instead, unnecessarily exacerbate the psychological trauma experienced by the person in crisis,” the complaint reads.
“The most effective response to a mental health crisis is to provide empathy, support, and a calm, safe environment. Although the District employs some mental health providers to respond to crises, it has not invested the resources needed or provided them the support necessary to be effective and widely deployed,” said Tracy Knight with Bread for the City.
National and local experts, including the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and National Alliance on Mental Illness, have concluded that the reliance on police to address mental health crises is more likely to exacerbate than alleviate the mental health issue for which help is sought, and accordingly recommend that communities invest in mental health providers to handle such emergencies.
In Washington, D.C., during FY 2022, less than 1 percent of 911 calls classified as mental health emergencies got a response from mental health clinicians and certified peer support specialists on a Community Response Team (CRT). In contrast, in FY 2022, 90 percent of 911 calls related to physical health emergencies got a response from an EMT or paramedic. Similarly, while D.C. has hired 1,600 EMTs, it has only 44 CRT staff. This understaffing has resulted in response times for CRTs ranging from one to three hours, compared to a benchmark of just five minutes for EMT response or nine minutes for paramedic response.
This lawsuit echoes the concerns raised by the , whose policy platform provides recommendations to overhaul the District's response to people experiencing mental health crises.
The following statements can be attributed as noted:
Michael Perloff, staff attorney at ACLU-D.C.:
“If I had a heart attack, I would want someone to call a trained medic, not a police officer. In the same way, if I had a mental health crisis, I would want a mental health provider to provide appropriate care. But that’s not what happens with mental health emergencies in the District of Columbia. Long wait times, a lack of mental health providers, and a police-first response puts people with mental health disabilities in the District at unacceptable risk. The District can and must do better.”
Ashika Verriest, senior staff attorney, ACLU Criminal Law Reform Project:
“Police are not the right people to respond to someone experiencing a mental health crisis, and we should stop expecting them to be. As a matter of safety and equality, D.C. and communities across the country must invest in robust and appropriate crisis response, so that all our neighbors get the proper care they need.”
Dan Brown, partner at Sheppard Mullin:
“Experts agree that someone experiencing a mental health crisis must be able to call a mental health provider who can help. It’s now time for our communities to do the right thing for residents experiencing mental health crises, and we are proud to partner with the ACLU to advance this important cause.”
Bread for the City v. District of Columbia was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
The complaint can be found here: /documents/bread-for-the-city-v-district-of-columbia-complaint
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.