ON Weds., the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an appeal, in a case filed just as the Seattle Police Department (SPD) began implementing the new policy, that claimed that the use-of-force policy unconstitutionally limited SPD officers’ ability to act in self-defense. With the ruling, the court acknowledged that the policy served the “City of Seattle’s important government interest in ensuring the safety of both the public and its police officers.”
According to officials, SPD’s new use-of-force policy, implemented in early 2014 after approval by the federal court overseeing the consent decree between the City and the U.S. Department of Justice has been a critical component in transforming policing for the residents of Seattle. Proponents claim that because SPD officers have followed that policy that the court-appointed monitor overseeing the Consent Decree found a 60 percent decline in incidents in which SPD officers have used force.
“On behalf of the City, I welcome this confirmation that constitutional policing and officer safety go hand-in-hand,” said City Attorney Pete Holmes, whose Civil Division attorneys defended SPD from U.S. District Court to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
The case is Mahoney v. City of Seattle.
