Policing Accountability, Reform, and the Criminal Justice System – Vanderbilt Law School

Report on Reforming U.S. Policing for Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction

This report examines the efficacy of the United States’ reliance on the criminal justice system to address complex social issues. Based on a discussion with Professor Farhang Heydari of Vanderbilt Law School, this analysis evaluates current policing models against the framework of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It outlines critical reforms necessary to build more effective, accountable, and equitable public safety institutions, with a focus on SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

Analysis of Current Policing Deficiencies and SDG Misalignment

Ineffective Metrics and Erosion of Community Trust

Current policing strategies are often misaligned with core public safety and sustainable development objectives. Police performance is frequently measured by metrics that do not correlate with reductions in harm, such as the volume of traffic stops and misdemeanor arrests. This approach incentivizes practices that are inconsistent with several SDGs.

• SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities): Tactics like “stop-and-frisk” and low-level traffic enforcement have been shown to generate significant racial disparities and erode community trust, undermining the goal of creating more equitable societies.
• SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions): The over-policing of minor infractions consumes valuable officer time that could be reallocated to investigating serious crimes. This inefficiency weakens the institution’s ability to provide justice and security, a core target of SDG 16.
• SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being): Police are often the default first responders to social crises for which they are not adequately trained, including mental health emergencies and addiction-related issues. This approach fails to provide appropriate care and can exacerbate harm, conflicting with the objectives of SDG 3.

A Framework for Systemic Reform Through Collaborative Engagement

Shifting from Litigation to Institutional Buy-In

Professor Heydari noted that high-damages civil rights litigation, while important for individual cases, has proven insufficient for driving systemic change. Municipalities and police departments often treat financial settlements as a cost of doing business rather than a catalyst for reform. This realization led to a strategic shift towards collaborative models that foster institutional and community buy-in, directly supporting SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

The Collaborative Model: A Pathway to SDG 16

The work of the Policing Project at NYU School of Law exemplifies a partnership-based approach. By working directly with police departments and communities, the project aims to reduce harm and measurably improve public safety. Key principles of this model include:

1. Involving Rank-and-File Officers: Engaging officers early in the reform process ensures that changes are not perceived as punitive and leverages their on-the-ground expertise. This fosters ownership and durability of reforms.
2. Utilizing Police as Credible Messengers: When reform initiatives are championed from within the department, they are received more effectively by an often-insular culture.
3. Integrating Community Experience: Ensuring that community perspectives are reflected in the design of new policies helps rebuild trust and legitimacy, which is fundamental to creating the peaceful and inclusive societies envisioned in SDG 16.

Case Study: Data-Driven Reform in Nashville

In Nashville, the Policing Project was enlisted to analyze traffic stop data after a community study indicating racial disparities was dismissed. The independent analysis confirmed the disparities. Through engagement with officers and residents, the city was convinced to cease using pretextual traffic stops as a primary crime-fighting tactic. This resulted in a 95% reduction in such stops without a corresponding increase in crime, demonstrating how evidence-based reform can advance both public safety and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Refocusing Public Safety for Sustainable Communities

Evidence-Based Practices and Alternative Responders

Achieving sustainable public safety requires a fundamental reallocation of resources toward evidence-based strategies. This aligns with SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) by ensuring that safety measures are both effective and inclusive.

• Focus on “Hard Police Work”: Professor Heydari advocates for redirecting police time away from low-yield tactics and toward relationship-building, trust cultivation, and investigative work that solves serious crimes.
• Develop Alternative Response Models: For social issues like mental health crises and homelessness, communities should build and deploy alternative response systems staffed by trained professionals, directly contributing to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).
• Leverage Technology Responsibly: Technology can be a powerful tool for crime-fighting, but its adoption must be guided by evidence of its effectiveness in improving safety without draining resources or infringing on rights.

The Role of Academic Institutions

Law schools and universities are uniquely positioned to support these reforms. As nonpartisan institutions, they can act as a vital resource for communities and governments, contributing to SDG 16 by strengthening institutional capacity. Their role includes:

• Providing legal clarity on complex issues like pretextual stops.
• Developing model statutes and policy templates for adoption by municipalities.
• Creating and preserving knowledge on effective public safety strategies.

Conclusion

The path toward a more just and effective public safety model requires a departure from ineffective, traditional policing tactics and an embrace of collaborative, evidence-based reforms. By reallocating resources, building trust, and focusing on measurable harm reduction, policing can be transformed into an institution that actively supports the Sustainable Development Goals. The ultimate objective is not the elimination of policing, but the creation of a more focused, accountable, and efficient system that operates where it is truly needed, contributing to safer, healthier, and more equitable communities for all.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article on policing reform and its intersection with social issues addresses several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The core themes of justice, institutional accountability, health, and inequality are prominently featured.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article explicitly mentions that police are often the default responders to social issues like “mental-health crises” and “addiction,” for which they are not adequately trained. This connects directly to the goal of ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: The text highlights how certain policing tactics “erode community trust, generate racial disparities.” The example of the Nashville study, which “confirmed substantial disparities” in traffic stops, directly addresses the goal of reducing inequality within and among countries.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The article discusses “homelessness” as another social issue improperly handled by the criminal justice system. Furthermore, the entire discussion is framed around improving “public safety” and building “durable community” trust, which are essential for creating safe, inclusive, and sustainable cities.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: This is the most central SDG to the article. The text focuses on improving accountability in the “criminal justice system,” reforming policing to be more effective and just, reducing violence (“fewer people dying at the hands of the police”), and building “effective, accountable and transparent institutions.” The emphasis on “community and officer buy-in” for reforms also aligns with creating inclusive institutions.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

   • Target 3.5: Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol. The article identifies “addiction” as a social issue that should be addressed by means other than policing, implying a need for stronger prevention and treatment systems.

2. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices. The article’s focus on eliminating policing tactics that “generate racial disparities,” such as pretextual traffic stops in Nashville, directly supports this target.

3. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

   • Target 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services. The mention of “homelessness” as a social issue that police are ill-equipped to handle points to the need for better housing and social service solutions, which is the focus of this target.

4. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere. This is directly addressed by the stated goals to have “fewer people dying at the hands of the police” and to reduce violent crime, as evidenced by the desire for serious crimes like murders to “be solved.”
   • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all. The article discusses representing “victims of government and policing misconduct” and the failure of civil rights litigation to create systemic change, highlighting challenges in ensuring equal access to justice.
   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels. The entire article is a call to reform police departments into more effective and accountable institutions by moving away from ineffective tactics and toward evidence-based practices that “measurably improve public safety.”
   • Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels. The article strongly advocates for this target by emphasizing that lasting reform requires “buy-in from the same people who must do the work” and that reforms are successful when communities and officers are involved early and “help shape the solution.”

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions and implies several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress.

• Reduction in Discriminatory Practices (Target 10.3): The article provides a direct, measurable indicator from its Nashville example: the number of traffic stops. The text states that “traffic stops in Nashville then fell by roughly 95% without a corresponding rise in crime.” Data on traffic stops, especially when analyzed for racial disparities, serves as a key indicator.
• Reduction in Violence and Death Rates (Target 16.1): The article implies two clear indicators:
  1. The number of “people who were killed at the hands of the police.”
  2. The clearance rate for serious crimes, as seen in the statement, “When murders are committed, we want them to be solved.”
• Institutional Effectiveness and Accountability (Target 16.6): The article implies that a key indicator of effectiveness is the reallocation of police resources. The shift away from “low-level traffic enforcement” to “safety-improving investigative work” can be measured. Additionally, community trust, which the Policing Project measured by convening “focus groups with residents and officers,” serves as a qualitative indicator of accountability.
• Handling of Social Issues (Targets 3.5 & 11.1): While not providing numbers, the article implies that progress could be measured by tracking the number of calls related to mental health, addiction, and homelessness that are diverted from police to more appropriate social service or healthcare responders.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: law.vanderbilt.edu