WASHINGTON (Legal Newsline) – District of Columbia cops will not have the chance to correct problems with their lawsuit that challenges a law passed during anti-police protests.
Federal judge James Boasberg threw out their case on Nov. 4 without prejudice, and on May 14 declined their request to file an amended complaint.
At issue is the D.C. Police Union to the Comprehensive Policing and Justice Reform Second Emergency Amendment Act, which was passed unanimously by the D.C. Council during protests that followed the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis.
That law says disciplinary matters shall be “retained by management and not be negotiable” - a measure that will be applied to all future collective bargaining agreements.
This makes the D.C. police union the only union out of more than 40 in the district to be unable to negotiate with management regarding the discipline of its members, the lawsuit said.
But Judge Boasberg in November turned away the union’s allegations that it violated their Constitutional rights and the Home Rule Act. His latest ruling refuses calls from the plaintiff to vacate the judgment.
“Even had the union managed to obtain vacatur, amendment would still not be warranted,” he wrote. “While permission for amendment ‘should (be) freely give(n)… when justice so requires, it need not be when amendment would be futile.
“In other words, if the new or amended causes of action would still be deficient notwithstanding the proposed amendment, courts need not grant leave.”
The police union wanted to add statements from councilmembers that it claims show the act is designed to punish cops. It says the statements indicate the law was passed without studies or community input and was instead a reaction to the deaths of Floyd and Breonna Taylor.
“(T)here is no plausible argument that the statements relevant to Section 116’s enactment are ‘unmistakable evidence of punitive intent,’ as required for the motivational factor to be determinative on its own,” Boasberg wrote.