The impact of COVID-19 on police officer activities

What Did Obergefell Change? Clearance of Intimate Partner Violence Before and After the Legalization of Same-Sex Marriage

Historically, same-sex intimate partner violence (IPV) was ignored, and victims often experienced high rates of harassment and intimidation from police, leading to low reporting of same-sex IPV incidents, victims' unwillingness to cooperate with the police, and common arrests in such incidents. Although the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) legalized and legitimized same-sex marriages and relationships in the U.S., mandating the inclusion of same-sex partners in protective order laws and yielding collateral benefits for victims of same-sex IPV, it is unclear if the decision has had a positive effect on same-sex IPV clearance rates. This study uses National Incident-Based Reporting System data to compare IPV clearance (arrest, dual arrest, victim noncooperation, and prosecution declined) pre (2013/2014) and post (2016/2017) Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). Regression results show no substantial changes in same-sex IPV clearance after Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). Compared to opposite-sex IPV, same-sex IPV was less likely to be cleared by arrest but much more likely to be cleared by dual arrest, victim noncooperation, and prosecution declined. Same-sex IPV involving Black couples and married partners were also less likely to be cleared by arrest but more likely to be cleared by dual arrest than Black/White same-sex IPV and incidents involving unmarried partners, respectively. Moreover, same-sex IPV victims experience unfavorable criminal justice outcomes in states with mandatory arrest policies but fare better in states that supported same-sex relationships prior to Obergefell. The implications of these findings for practice and research are discussed.

POLICING IN THE AGE OF THE GUN

This Article examines how the rapid deregulation and rampant possession of firearms is likely going to impact policing, and the constitutional law that governs it. For the longest time, lawful gun carry, concealed or open, was exceedingly rare. For a police officer to see a gun was both to see danger, and a crime in progress. This link among guns, danger, and unlawful possession has shaped much of the law of policing. But now, this understanding of the world is in its last stages of unraveling. In nearly all states, guns are no longer unlawful to own and carry by default. In many, they are barely regulated. Recent Supreme Court Second Amendment decisions like New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen serve only to hasten where state laws already were headed. For police, however, the harm guns can do exists irrespective of what the law has to say about the legality of carrying them. As a result, the nation's gun laws are on a collision course with the practice and law of policing. This Article explores how the constitutional law governing policing is changing and will change in the face of gun legalization. Part I of this Article explains the ubiquitous role guns play in the life of a police officer, and what actions guns lead police to take. Part II is about the legal doctrine of policing, both before and after firearm legalization. It details how the law shaped what police could do in order to protect themselves and others, and how that law is changing to accommodate legalization. Police now must operate in a terrain that increasingly is uncertain as to their lawful authority, and that in many instances may put them or others in jeopardy. Part III examines how the shifting laws of guns and policing might impact police behavior, likely resulting in ad hoc carve-outs for police authority that-if history is any guide-overwhelmingly will be imposed on Black and Brown communities.

A study on mental health and its influencing factors among police officers during the COVID-19 epidemic in China

Background

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has had a tremendous impact on people's health and well-being. The crisis also threw into sharp relief the fact that police officers faced an increased risk of developing mental health problems. The main purpose of this study was to explore the effects of work stress and risk perception on the mental health of police officers during the epidemic.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional online survey among police officers in Wuhan city, China, and data were collected from 11 March to 12 May 2022. A total of 358 questionnaires were received, of which 302 were considered valid. The questionnaires included demographic information, work stress scale, Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90) and epidemic risk perception scale. Descriptive analyses, one-way analysis of variance and linear regression were used to analyze the data.

Results

The prevalence of mental health problems was 38.74% among the surveyed police officers. The results indicated that the total score of SCL-90 and its subdimensions were positively correlated with work stress and risk perception. Moreover, we found that three factors were relevant to the police's mental health: age, marital status, and education.

Conclusion

Front-line police officers tend to show a higher prevalence of symptoms of mental disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that increased work stress and risk perception may adversely affect police officers' mental health. Consequently, policy-makers and police organizations should establish an internal mental health problem coping team to improve police officers' mental health resilience.

Gang intervention during COVID-19: A qualitative study of multidisciplinary teams and street outreach in Denver

Gang and violence intervention programs have become a staple in American cities. These programs often find themselves navigating turbulent political environments, a challenge that can be exacerbated during times of societal upheaval, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The current study examines how the pandemic impacted the forms and functions of the Gang Reduction Initiative of Denver (GRID). While GRID coordinates many strategies and collaborates with government and community groups across Denver, its centerpiece intervention entails multidisciplinary teams and street outreach, the focus of this qualitative study. We draw on 197  hours of field-based observation and 19 semi-structured interviews gathered as part of an evaluation of this intervention-initiated prior to the pandemic-to arrive at three key conclusions on the impact of COVID-19. First, upper-level administrative support can be a critical factor in agency efficacy and morale. City government's tenuous familiarity and ties with GRID was consequential to non-essential classification at the early stage of the pandemic. Second, agency leaders are crucial advocates for their agency, as GRID navigated many challenges without stable leadership and suffered as a result. Finally, interagency collaboration and relationships are slow to develop and easy to lose, made even more fragile in times of crisis. We discuss these findings in the context of large-scale federal investment in community violence intervention.