Interview with Rachel A. Pickens Rachel A. Pickens is a civil rights attorney and Executive Director of the National Police Accountability Project (NPAP), a nonprofit project of the National Lawyers Guild, which was founded in 1937 as the first racially integrated US bar association. The central mission of the NPAP is to promote the accountability of law enforcement officers and their employers for violations of the Constitution and the laws of the United States.
by Amelia Spalter ’21 illustration by Nicholas Edwards ’23
Amelia Spalter: When you meet someone who says something like, “I support police reform, but I’m hesitant to abolish them altogether because my ex-boyfriend is abusive and if he violates the restraining order, I need someone to call,” what do you tell them? Rachel A. Pickens: That discussion has been the one I’ve been chewing on most because, while the conversation on abolition has been around since the 1940s, for probably 99 percent of Americans, the word abolition with reference to the police is brand-new. There are still some weighty questions about abolition, especially when juxtaposed [with] police reform. When we juxtapose abolition [with] reform, it sounds hasty and completely unfathomable. But I’m glad the discussion is happening, because when you really dive deep, abolition contains multitudes. This includes defunding the police, which means reallocation of resources from police departments to other entities that have been underfunded for decades. It’s re-examining ineffective structures to reshape the future of policing 10 years from now, 20 years from now. If the word “abolition” by itself scares someone off, then I think that person is losing out on some really important concepts about reimagining everything that makes policing the way it is. I would also say that we all know that education, food security, job security, and physical and mental health all factor into how a community interacts within itself. If those things are taken care of, and if we refocus on what policing is actually good for, that means police officers would no longer be the ones who respond to distress calls. Police should not be first responders for probably 90 percent of the calls they receive, but, because there’s no alternative, they’re what we get. I can absolutely see why people fear an absence of police, but I hope that they push through that fear and realize that there are some things within the abolition concept that are just as important as those within reform. Can people who are in favor of abolishing the police also be in favor of reforming the current system? Abolition is, again, a heavy, strong word, and in regard to a policing system that’s been around
since the 1870s, it’s like a monument just being gone. But here we go, monuments are being taken down as we speak, and with good reason. [That being said,] reform and abolition are going to be living in the same space. The road to abolition is long. I don’t think abolition will be happening countrywide in my lifetime. It could happen in pockets. So meanwhile, while there is a vision for abolition, it’s okay to also look at the reform and figure out, “Okay if we can’t do abolition now, are there things we can pull from reform now?” For example, the stripping of the strength of police unions and things that will affect their day-to-day movements. Not just antibias training or de-escalation training, because clearly that alone won’t work. The officer who killed Rayshard Brooks had just had anti-bias training and de-escalation training two months prior, so that clearly did nothing. The way NPAP is trying to go [is] towards reform; actual reform, not just the toothless reform that Minneapolis’ police department had. Actual reform is about [offending] officers facing consequences. Not just in a distant report that no one can ever see, [but] transparent, where the community will have access to it. So, right now, I’m not asking people to make a choice between abolition and reform, because I see this as a “both.” You have to make room for both conversations, because each one benefits from the other. Were any mainstream politicians vocal proponents of police accountability before the murder of George Floyd? Julián Castro was, even back when there were more than 25 Democratic presidential candidates. I won’t say he’s the only one, but he has probably always had the strongest voice about police accountability. The thing is, police unions have such a stranglehold politically. They’re issue-based, they will support candidates regardless of whether they’re Republican, Democrat or Independent. Julián Castro is one of the only ones who really intentionally brings these issues up.
What steps would you recommend people take to continue driving forward momentum on this issue? For those who want to continue to help, voting is going to have to be one of the steps, and not just because it controls the whole presidency. Starting locally, voting will be really important. I know a lot of people, myself included, are tired of hearing that, because voting is critically important, but it’s not the end-all be-all. [As] we’ve seen, whomever you vote for, you’ve got to actively push people to really hear you. Some other things also include supporting any local criminal justice grassroots activism, because while a lot of nonprofits like ours have been overwhelmed with support, we know that things will be quieter than they are now. Protesting is also still very important. I don’t doubt that there will be other police killings in the future. Protesting is something that has tremendous value and always sets a pace for everything else. How do you recommend police brutality activists keep from getting burned out during this historic surge of awareness of their cause? This has been professionally and personally very difficult for me. The way I have been able to move through these past [months] has been the support of others. Not just attorneys, but the first responders on the front lines, the protesters. I know all this can be overwhelming, especially for those who are new to this conversation. So it’s okay to, A) not know everything, B) ask more questions and provide answers—but don’t ask your Black and Brown friends—do the work on your own, Google is free. And C), take a little break. Because movements can be everlasting, and with movement work, there is always going to be a need for sustainability. I know that this work isn’t going to end for a very long time. For those who want to join, you’re always welcome, and for those who were in it long before I was, thank you. I hope that they will take care of themselves in this time and reflect on how important it is that people are coming out and doing this work during a pandemic. It’s astounding. Nothing is going to be the same after this. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. THE HOME ISSUE
51
