The D.C. Council on Tuesday passed emergency public safety legislation as the city weathers a violent summer, establishing a new crime for firing a gun in public and making it easier for judges to detain people charged with violent offenses before trial — a provision that drew extended debate.
“This legislation today is a major step forward in our effort to create a safer D.C. for all residents, and it cannot wait,” Pinto said. “I want to say to families, businesses, partners of the District: We hear you, and we know we need to do more to keep you safe.”
Pinto’s proposal garnered broad support despite escalating tension between the Bowser administration and members of the D.C. Council — particularly Chairman Phil Mendelson (D) — about who is to blame for rising crime in D.C., and what should be done to reduce it.
Mendelson reiterated Tuesday that he believes police improving their closure rates and prosecutors acting more aggressively would have a more significant impact on crime than any council legislation. But he said he was tired of a public perception — which he said was perpetuated by the mayor — that the D.C. Council wasn’t taking crime seriously. Bowser had taken aim at the council a day earlier, noting a previous vote to cut the police department’s budget several years ago.
“I’m angry, and I am angry because … the council is being blamed,” Mendelson said, describing a perception that the council “does not care.” “I think there are things the mayor can do outside legislation with regard to public safety — and she’s not doing it. … Today’s legislation is useful — and let me be clear: I am not criticizing the police. But what angers me is I think our citizenry is being misled. Crime fighting is primarily a function of the executive branch, the police and other law enforcement agencies.”
Council member Brianne K. Nadeau (D-Ward 1) echoed Mendelson’s remarks. Bowser, she suggested, “can ask [D.C. police] why they’re not patrolling equitably across the city, or provide data on what they’re doing, or [ask] why the U.S. attorney is declining two-thirds of the cases. I want to reiterate: This council is united in addressing public safety issues and we’ll continue to do it.”
A spokeswoman for Bowser did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the criticisms leveled at the mayor. For her part, Bowser celebrated the passage of the legislation. “Our community is in agreement that the status quo is unacceptable,” she said in a statement, adding that no one should be afraid to let their children play outside or walk to the bus stop for fear of crime. “The legislation that the Council passed today will fill gaps in our criminal justice system and, in doing so, will increase accountability for violent and criminal behavior and make our city safer.”
Despite some frustration at Bowser, council members said they were unified on the need to take urgent action as violence escalates in the city. They agreed with almost all provisions of Pinto’s legislation, with the exception of one impassioned objection from Lewis George to the changes regarding pretrial detention.
Mendelson and other members who initially voiced skepticism about Bowser’s legislation, dubbed “Safer, Stronger,” warmed to Pinto’s similar proposal after she narrowed some provisions involving pretrial detention for juveniles and changed or eliminated others. Bowser, who had described Pinto’s bill as retaining “the heart” of her bill, had urged the council to support it.
Pinto’s bill, the Prioritizing Public Safety Emergency Amendment Act, expands access to private security cameras through an incentive program and allows pretrial GPS monitoring data to be used as evidence against defendants, among several other provisions. It also creates new crimes, including endangerment with a firearm and a strangulation offense. Such charges had previously been included in the Revised Criminal Code Act that Congress blocked from going into effect.
But the provisions that drew the most debate centered on the circumstances under which defendants could be detained as they await trial. Pinto’s proposal would have judges presume that adults charged with violent crimes and juveniles charged with certain offenses should be detained. Defendants would have an opportunity to argue against that determination, with Pinto stressing that judges are not “mandated” to detain anyone.
Lewis George proposed an amendment — which failed — striking the entire provision that would create a presumption that adults charged with violent offenses be detained pretrial, saying it needed more time and scrutiny.
Lewis George pointed to pretrial data and suggested the legislation would not substantially help reduce crime. According to a December report from the Pretrial Services Agency, 88 percent of adults released pretrial remained arrest-free over the last five years, and under 2 percent were charged with a violent offense while out.
Lewis George argued during the meeting Tuesday that expanding a presumption of pretrial detention to all violent crimes would mark a dramatic change to the District’s law, repeating mistakes of the tough-on-crime past and depriving defendants of due process.
The current law only has judges apply that presumption in particular circumstances, such as cases in which a person is charged with committing a violent or dangerous offense while armed or out awaiting trial in another case. Otherwise, a judge must find “clear and convincing evidence” that keeping a person in jail is the only way to keep the community safe and ensure their appearance at trial.
“What happens when you’re locked up pretrial? You have the potential of losing housing. If you’re a parent, you have the potential of your children being taken from you. If you have a job, you have the potential of being fired,” Lewis George said. “All I’m asking for my colleagues to do — we can address this on a permanent basis, but the evidence does not suggest we [need to] do this on an emergency basis.”
Council member Matthew Frumin (D-Ward 3) similarly said that he worried Pinto’s proposal was casting an “overbroad” net by expanding the pretrial detention presumption to all violent crimes, and that it was all happening too fast. He suggested the legislation should focus on crimes that were on the rise. But he ultimately opposed Lewis George’s amendment and voted for the legislation.
“This really is a hard one,” he said. “I have quite a lot of sympathy [for the argument] that Janeese Lewis George was making, but I also do think — I wish we were not doing this on an emergency basis, but it is an emergency.”
Only one council member, Vincent C. Gray (D-Ward 7), participating virtually and without commenting on his position, supported Lewis George’s amendment.
Pinto’s proposal went further than the mayor’s “Safer, Stronger” bill with respect to expanding pretrial detention. The mayor’s proposal would have expanded the presumption of pretrial detention to cases in which a person with a violent criminal conviction was charged with a new violent offense.
But Pinto’s proposal called for more limited pretrial detention of juveniles compared with Bowser’s, assuaging some of the objections to the mayor’s legislation.
Bowser wanted juveniles to be detained pretrial in virtually all cases in which a judge found “substantial probability” they committed a violent or dangerous crime, regardless of whether the juvenile was alleged to be armed, as the law now requires. In perhaps the most controversial provision, the mayor proposed detaining juveniles in some cases for their own protection, even if they posed no danger to the community. D.C. Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb (D) argued the proposal was not backed up by data and would not make the community safer, though on Tuesday he celebrated Pinto’s legislation as “better and more targeted.”
Pinto’s emergency bill added only specific crimes for which children would face a presumption of pretrial detention if they were not accused of being armed. Those crimes include murder, first-degree sexual assault, carjacking or assault with intent to commit any of those offenses. Juveniles would also face a presumption of pretrial detention if they were charged with committing a violent offense while armed.
The D.C. Police Union, which has lambasted the council as “anti-police” after it passed a sweeping police reform bill, applauded passage of the legislation on Tuesday and Pinto’s leadership of it.
“It is a breath of fresh air to see the City Council actually introducing and passing some common sense, logical bills that move in the direction of holding criminals accountable,” the chairman, Greggory Pemberton, said in a statement.
Passage of the legislation comes as the District continues to struggle with violent crime, up 33 percent this year over last, driven by spikes in homicides and robberies. Carjackings also continue to rise; the 140 incidents in June were the most in a single month in at least five years.
Crime during the pandemic rose in cities across the country and has started to drop recently in some categories, though it has not fully retreated to levels before coronvirus-related shutdowns. D.C. is bucking the trend.
Police in D.C. said the city has recorded 129 homicides this year, up 17 percent from this time in 2022. The city is on pace for 200 or more homicides for the third consecutive year and is moving close to what might be the highest yearly total in two decades. Killings, meanwhile, have fallen in Philadelphia, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York and Baltimore.
July has been particularly difficult, with 12 killings in the first nine days, including four people fatally shot on the Fourth of July. Victims this month included a community college student, a military interpreter from Afghanistan who came to the United States to escape the Taliban and a teacher and wrestling coach visiting from Kentucky to attend a seminar.
Twelve juveniles have been killed in the first half of this year, compared with 18 slain in all of 2022. The number of juveniles shot as of June 22 in the District had doubled from the same period last year.