Jackson’s court agreement on roadblocks could have implications across Mississippi

Oct. 10—JACKSON — Timothy Halcomb was driving in his south Jackson neighborhood when he approached what he thought was the positioning of a automotive crash. However quickly, law enforcement officials walked as much as his automotive window demanding his drivers’ license and proof of insurance coverage.

Halcomb puzzled why officers had been asking for his info. They by no means gave him a cause.

Seems, the officers had been there to conduct a routine roadblock that was part of its “Ticket Arrest Tow” coverage. This tactic was meant to cut back violent crime by figuring out drivers at checkpoints with excellent arrest warrants.

Now the town has entered right into a court docket settlement that may considerably scale back its use of those checkpoints. The settlement might have implications throughout the state for cities and counties that depend on comparable techniques.

“Now we have all acquired complaints from folks in different cities and cities which have contacted us about this lawsuit saying the identical factor is going on in my metropolis and my city,” mentioned Paloma Wu, an legal professional for the Mississippi Heart for Justice who was concerned in litigation over the roadblocks in Jackson. “We completely hope this places folks on discover.”

Beneath Jackson’s latest checkpoint coverage, drivers who had been arrested would sometimes see their automotive towed, including a whole lot of {dollars} in charges and fines to get the car again.

“I assumed to myself, ‘Why are they doing this to us?’ We aren’t criminals,” Halcomb mentioned. “We reside in a poor neighborhood, however we aren’t criminals.”

Halcomb and different Jackson residents challenged this coverage in federal court docket, arguing that it was a violation of their constitutional rights. The capital metropolis on Thursday agreed to settle with the plaintiffs and enter right into a four-year consent decree and enact a number of reforms to its roadblock course of.

Civil rights advocates and different critics say the checkpoints did extra hurt than good, particularly after they occurred in lower-income areas.

Story continues

Cliff Johnson, an advocacy legal professional who filed the lawsuit, mentioned he understands that individuals have issues about violent crime. Nevertheless, he mentioned that group efforts to stop violence are a greater instrument than of heaping fines onto low-income residents

“What really finally ends up taking place is crime goes up, not down,” Johnson mentioned.

Beneath the settlement, the town agreed to launch knowledge on future checkpoints and solely conduct checkpoints in restricted conditions, like holidays when alcohol consumption is predicted or within the occasion of an uncommon variety of automotive crashes in a selected space.

The settlement additionally says if an individual is stopped at a checkpoint for causes aside from a driving offense, officers might problem fines however not make arrests in the event that they discover the driving force with out insurance coverage or with a suspended license.

taylor.vance@djournal.com