DOJ Dismisses Consent Decrees Affecting Louisville and Minneapolis Police
The Civil Rights Division will be taking all necessary steps to dismiss the Louisville and Minneapolis lawsuits with prejudice, to close the underlying investigations into the Louisville and Minneapolis police departments.
The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division has begun the process of dismissing lawsuits against the Louisville and Minneapolis departments.
These lawsuits, which were filed at the last minute by the Biden administration after President Donald Trump’s reelection, accused Louisville and Minneapolis of widespread patterns of unconstitutional policing practices by wrongly equating statistical disparities with intentional discrimination and heavily relying on flawed methodologies and incomplete data. They also sought to subject the Louisville and Minneapolis police departments to sweeping consent decrees that went far beyond the Biden administration’s accusations of unconstitutional conduct; the decrees would have governed many aspects of those police departments, including their management, supervision, training, performance evaluations, discipline, staffing, recruitment, and hiring. In short, these sweeping consent decrees would have imposed years of micromanagement of local police departments by federal courts and expensive independent monitors, and potentially hundreds of millions of dollars of compliance costs, without a legally or factually adequate basis for doing so, DOJ said in a press release.
“Overbroad police consent decrees divest local control of policing from communities where it belongs, turning that power over to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats, often with an anti-police agenda,” added Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. “Today, we are ending the Biden Civil Rights Division’s failed experiment of handcuffing local leaders and police departments with factually unjustified consent decrees.”
The Civil Rights Division will be taking all necessary steps to dismiss the Louisville and Minneapolis lawsuits with prejudice, to close the underlying investigations into the Louisville and Minneapolis police departments, and to retract the Biden administration’s findings of constitutional violations.
The Civil Rights Division will also be closing its investigations into, and retracting the Biden administration’s findings of constitutional violations on the part of, the following additional local police departments:
Phoenix, Arizona
Trenton, New Jersey
Memphis, Tennessee
Mount Vernon, New York
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Louisiana State Police
The Department of Justice will continue to offer its full support to police departments across the country, including through grants and technical assistance. The Department is confident that the vast majority of police officers across the Nation will continue to vigorously enforce the law and protect the public in full compliance with the Constitution and all applicable federal laws. When bad actors in uniform fail to do so, the Department stands ready to take all necessary action to address any resulting constitutional or civil-rights violations, including via criminal prosecution.
The National Fraternal Order of Police has praised the DOJ decision.
“Consent decrees have never worked and will never work. We need to focus on constructive and collaborative paths to reform without the destructive impacts like the increased crime and inflated costs that always come along with consent decrees,” National FOP President Patrick Yoes declared. “We are grateful to U.S. Attorney General Bondi and her team at the Justice Department for this quick and decisive action.”
More Point of Law

Point of Law: The Limits of Electronic Searches
Can an individual be prosecuted for despicable criminal conduct based on evidence obtained in violation of the United States Constitution? Ultimately, the Ninth Circuit judges wrote, “In the circumstances of this case (United States v. Holcomb, 23-469 (9th Cir. 2025)), respect for the Constitution and the rule of law requires an answer of “no.”
Read More →Trump Issues Order Cutting Federal Funding in Cashless Bail Jurisdictions
<strong>“</strong>Cashless bail policies allow dangerous individuals to immediately return to the streets and further endanger law-abiding, hard-working Americans because they know our laws will not be enforced,” the administration said.
Read More →Justice Department Sues Los Angeles Over Sanctuary Policies
The DOJ said in a press release that the “sanctuary city” policies of the City of Los Angeles are illegal under federal law.
Read More →
Understanding Officer-Created Jeopardy
Officers can be criminally prosecuted for using force when their actions led to escalation during contact with subjects.
Read More →
Point of Law: The Limitations of Search Warrants
In the Tenth Circuit case of Cuervo v. Sorenson, the Court ruled officers cannot deviate from the language of the warrant.
Read More →New Michigan Bill would Give Officers Civil Immunity in Self-Defense Cases
House Bill 4404 would create a presumption of civil immunity for individuals who are cleared criminally after using force in self-defense, shifting the burden of proof onto plaintiffs.
Read More →Seattle to Pay Police Captain $1 Million to Settle Lawsuit
Seattle police Capt. Eric Greening sued former Chief Adrian Diaz last year alleging that Diaz retaliated when Greening brought up concerns about racial and gender discrimination.
Read More →Washington Agencies Ordered to Not Delete Critical Facebook Contents
Jim Leighty, a local activist, filed two federal lawsuits last year claiming both agencies deleted or hid critical comments he had written below multiple posts, while keeping comments that were pro-police in nature.
Read More →Washington State Attorney General Sues Sheriff for Helping Immigration Enforcement
The lawsuit claims the Adams County Sheriff’s Office has illegally held people in custody based only on their immigration status, helped federal agents question people in custody, and given immigration officials confidential personal information.
Read More →
Dave Smith: Pardon Me
While a pardon restores your rights, it doesn’t erase your conviction, nor does it shield you from civil suits, seizure and forfeitures, or protect you from other prosecutions for crimes other than the ones pardoned.
Read More →