MA SWAT teams claim they are private corporations

[Broken]

Massachusetts SWAT teams claim they’re private corporations, immune from open records laws

According to the ACLU, the LECs (Law Enforcement Council) are claiming that the 501(c)(3) status means that they’re private corporations, not government agencies. And therefore, they say they’re immune from open records requests. Let’s be clear. These agencies oversee police activities. They employ cops who carry guns, wear badges, collect paychecks provided by taxpayers and have the power to detain, arrest, injure and kill. They operate SWAT teams, which conduct raids on private residences. And yet they say that because they’ve incorporated, they’re immune to Massachusetts open records laws. The state’s residents aren’t permitted to know how often the SWAT teams are used, what they’re used for, what sort of training they get or who they’re primarily used against.

Really, what the hell is this? How are SWAT teams not government agencies? Are they not law enforcement any longer and someone forgot to tell me?

[PKRudeBoy]

Some Massachusetts cops must be reading too much cyberpunk. Jennifer Government and Shadowrun are not supposed to be guidebooks.

[TimothyC]

I think this means that they've just lost all claims to sovereign immunity. Time to sue them into oblivion.

[Highlord Laan]

I think this means that they've just lost all claims to sovereign immunity. Time to sue them into oblivion.

They also loser all those legal protections they abuse when the no-knock a house.

[Lord Anubis]

Wouldn't it also mean that they have no right to enforce the law or warrants since as private corporations they are not agents of the government anymore but private citizens. They'd be subject to kidnapping charges if they attempted to arrest someone wouldn't they?

[loomer]

Wouldn't it also mean that they have no right to enforce the law or warrants since as private corporations they are not agents of the government anymore but private citizens. They'd be subject to kidnapping charges if they attempted to arrest someone wouldn't they?

I'd have to check the laws of Mass., but not necessarily, no. You or I can go arrest someone right now if we have reasonable grounds based on having seen - or having factual knowledge of - their having committed a suitable offence, the police are unavailable, and we make a strident endeavour to deliver them to the authorities as quickly as possible. We just don't because it's generally better to let the police handle that sort of thing in the first place. However, they -would- be liable for mistaken arrests as kidnapping or false imprisonment, and if they detained anyone longer than strictly necessary it could get thorny.

[Borgholio]

Damn, this could backfire seriously. As a private corporation they need to get licenses and permits to carry the kinds of heavy weapons that they use, they'd need to obey any kind of open / concealed carry laws on the books, they might be able to make citizen's arrests but they could not enter private property or break into someone's home, and any shootings would have to be clearly documented as self defense...otherwise it could be manslaughter or worse.

Bad idea...but I'm waiting to see the comedy that ensues.

[Ahriman238]

*Sigh*

Only in Mass.... One problem with living near so many colleges is everyone thinks they're clever.

Very well, a thought experiment, ladies and gents. It appears that a corporate paramilitary group has been carrying out what might charitably be termed a reign of terror on my home state for over a decade. Charitably in that the term implies a higher purpose to their murder and mayhem. This group is extremely heavily armed with military grade weapons, responsible for multiple deaths and insists on their right to force entry into private residences without asking or identifying themselves. Said group further laughs at the very concept of oversight, both from the government and the courts.

What would reasonably be the next step? With whom do we seek redress?

[Borgholio]

*Sigh*

Only in Mass.... One problem with living near so many colleges is everyone thinks they're clever.

Very well, a thought experiment, ladies and gents. It appears that a corporate paramilitary group has been carrying out what might charitably be termed a reign of terror on my home state for over a decade. Charitably in that the term implies a higher purpose to their murder and mayhem. This group is extremely heavily armed with military grade weapons, responsible for multiple deaths and insists on their right to force entry into private residences without asking or identifying themselves. Said group further laughs at the very concept of oversight, both from the government and the courts.

What would reasonably be the next step? With whom do we seek redress?

As a thought experiment?

1. Call the police. They would be responsible for securing the city from an armed mercenary group.

2. Call in the Army. The military is tasked with protecting citizens from attacks by paramilitary / terrorist groups.

[Block]

Wouldn't this remove them from all government benefits and the ability to use public funds without a signed contract that would have to be opened up for competing bids? Wouldn't it also mean that they would need some sort of new laws passed in order for them to use state records for arrest warrants?

[General Zod]

Wouldn't this remove them from all government benefits and the ability to use public funds without a signed contract that would have to be opened up for competing bids? Wouldn't it also mean that they would need some sort of new laws passed in order for them to use state records for arrest warrants?

I honestly don't think they thought this through that far.

[RogueIce]

It's probably a paperwork thing. The officers themselves are drawn from the various towns the LECs represent, so that's covered. But the LEC itself is not of those towns.

I get the feeling that an argument they might go for is that the LEC itself is not a governmental agency, so their records aren't eligible. But the townships that use their services are, and (theoretically) they should have records of operations in their towns, or using the officers from their towns in what is essentially a large-scale MOU between multiple agencies.

Of course, to use the NEMLEC example, that means going to each of the 48 town governments and filing separate FOI requests with each of them, which is more of a hassle than just filing with NEMLEC itself.

That's just a theory though. I don't know how it works in MA, and since that state's open records laws are apparently "weak" (the article's characterization, not mine) we'll see how it all plays out. Just saying they're claiming a 501(c)(3) status is, I'm sure, barely the tip of the iceberg as far as what their real legal argument will be, after all. Maybe there's some quirk in MA law that lets them do this, I don't know.

I'd be interested in seeing what an article from a more neutral source would say, as they might shed more light on the argument being used by the LECs (or just this one in particular). This is basically a blog post from a dude who wrote a book about the "militarization of police" so y'know, he may have a bit of a bias. For all we know the LECs are on solid legal ground here. Maybe my theory does pan out: you can go to the towns for those records, just not the LECs. In which case, I suppose, tough cookies but you'll have to put in the extra work.

Still, let's see what an actual court has to say before smugging it up about private police and all that, as I'm pretty sure that will be the ACLU's next step if they haven't already filed. They're pretty good about that sort of thing, after all.

[Kamakazie Sith]

The thread title is not accurate.

The MA SWAT teams aren't claiming to be private corporations. NEMLEC is claiming this and they're right. They've been a non-profit organization since 1969. The ACLU can still get the records by filing separate requests with each of the member agencies.

That being said. I think NEMLEC should be ordered to hand them over since they are in fact acting as a regional law enforcement resource.

[Simon_Jester]

Since they operate under color of law, they should be expected to adhere to the standards a real law enforcement agency is held to.

Now, that doesn't mean the ACLU can expect them to keep records that it is properly the townships' responsibility to keep. But they should still be answerable for things like violating constitutional rights or wrongful arrests... and I suspect their real legal argument isn't trying to deny that they are.

[Replicant]

The thread title is not accurate.

The MA SWAT teams aren't claiming to be private corporations. NEMLEC is claiming this and they're right. They've been a non-profit organization since 1969. The ACLU can still get the records by filing separate requests with each of the member agencies.

That being said. I think NEMLEC should be ordered to hand them over since they are in fact acting as a regional law enforcement resource.

So the police are using a private company to handle the records and the private company is using that status to refuse to hand over requested information?

[Kamakazie Sith]

The thread title is not accurate.

The MA SWAT teams aren't claiming to be private corporations. NEMLEC is claiming this and they're right. They've been a non-profit organization since 1969. The ACLU can still get the records by filing separate requests with each of the member agencies.

That being said. I think NEMLEC should be ordered to hand them over since they are in fact acting as a regional law enforcement resource.

So the police are using a private company to handle the records and the private company is using that status to refuse to hand over requested information?

No. Each agency should be keeping its own records and I believe the ACLU could petition those individual agencies for those records but instead of doing so they requested NEMLECs records.

Here is the statement from the ACLU

"As part of an effort to document regional policing operations, the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Massachusetts (“ACLUM”) requested documents concerning NEMLEC’s SWAT Team and RRT in July 2012. The request sought NEMLEC’s training materials, incident reports, deployment statistics, guidelines, procurement records, budgets, agreements with other agencies and documents relating to the structure of the SWAT team and RRT."