California’s Plan to Ban Police Dogs for Crowd Control, Arrests Stalls in Assembly

Illustration - Getty Images

California’s proposal to ban police canines was shelved in the Assembly on May 31 but is expected to return next year for consideration.

Assembly Bill 742, authored by Assemblyman Corey Jackson (D-Perris) and Assemblyman Ah Kalra (D-San Jose), was introduced in February to end what they said was the deeply racialized and harmful practice of using police dogs against Black Americans and people of color.

Jackson pulled the legislation from the Assembly floor on May 31 and will present it again next session, according to his office.

“The status of the bill was changed to a two-year bill, which is why it was not put on the floor for a vote,” Jackson’s spokesman Daniel Peeden told The Epoch Times. “It’s still an active bill.”

Facing heavy opposition from law enforcement agencies, the legislation would have made California the first state to restrict police from using canines for arrests and crowd control. Under the legislation, law enforcement could still use canines in search and rescue operations, for detecting bombs and sniffing out narcotics.

Los Angeles Police Department K-9 officers prepare for an operation in Los Angeles on Dec. 13, 2018. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

AB 742 was supported by 30 organizations—including the California Public Defenders Association and National Police Accountability Project—and opposed by about 40 groups.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) California Action, the bill’s sponsor, claims police canines are used by the country to violently oppress Black Americans and people of color and fail to serve a legitimate public safety interest.

Jackson told The Epoch Times in February the bill addressed the historic implications of police dogs when they were used in the 1950s and 1960s during the Civil Rights movement to “stop black people from voting and registering to vote.”

“Since their inception, police canines have been used to inflict brutal violence and lifelong trauma on Black Americans and communities of color,” Jackson said in a statement. “It’s time to end this cruel and inhumane practice and, instead, work towards building trust between the police and the communities they serve.”

Oppositions

More than 30 law enforcement agencies across the state were against the bill, according to an analysis prepared for the Assembly in late May (pdf).

“K-9 units are a valuable de-escalation tool that keeps our communities safe,” San Diego Police Chief David Nisleit wrote on social media on June 1. “This bill as written should not be considered. We are glad to see it is no longer moving forward and stand ready to re-engage if this bill works its way back onto the agenda.”

Though Los Angeles County Sheriff Robert Luna agreed with prohibiting the use of canines for crowd control during protests and demonstrations, he said he couldn’t support other restrictions.

“I cannot support a bill that severely restricts an officer’s ability to employ a proven, effective, and less lethal force option that can de-escalate other potentially life-threatening situations,” Luna said in a statement.

Assembly Republicans applauded the decision to stall the legislation.

“We successfully defeated the police dog ban bill! AB 742 would have severely restricted our law enforcement from using K-9s to catch criminals. Our communities and peace officers are safer as a result,” the California Assembly Republicans wrote on Twitter on May 31.

Assemblyman Juan Alanis (R-Modesto) also wrote on Twitter he “believe[s] this bill would have led to more officer-involved shootings & deaths.”

“AB 742 was dangerous to law enforcement, criminals & communities across all of [California],” he posted on May 31.