A Novel Way to Fight Gangs

An innovative D.C. plan should balance safety and civil liberties.

MAYOR Adrian M. Fenty (D) and Attorney General Peter J. Nickles have introduced an anti-gang initiative that is as intriguing as it is potentially problematic.

The proposal allows the D.C. government to go to court to designate as a public nuisance a gang or a "crew" that "injures the health, safety and security of the District's citizens, frightens or intimidates them, obstructs the free use of both private and public property, and interferes with the comfortable enjoyment of the lives and property of the District's residents."

With a judge's approval, the government would be allowed to set up neighborhood "safety zones" deemed off-limits as meeting places for those identified as members of the designated gangs. Other restrictions could include a curfew, a prohibition on defacing property with graffiti and a ban on using private property without the written consent of the owner. Gang members who violate the court-imposed prohibitions could be fined up to $1,000 or be jailed for 30 days to one year. People not originally identified as gang members could later be added to the injunction; the boundaries of the safety zone may also be altered with court approval to adjust for gang movement.

The District modeled its proposal after gang injunctions in California and Texas that courts have upheld. In Los Angeles, such programs have been in use for two decades, and there are 30 or so injunctions in place throughout the Los Angeles area. Law enforcement officials there say these tools have been instrumental in lowering the rate of violent crime as well as reducing "quality of life" crimes such as graffiti, disturbing the peace, and drinking or using drugs in public. Academic studies differ on the programs' effectiveness.

District leaders are right to consider innovative and novel approaches to eliminate the scourge of gang violence and return safety to law-abiding residents who have been under siege, some for many years. But they must do so while respecting civil liberties. The proposal is scheduled to be debated before the D.C. Council's Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary on Friday. The District should be pressed to explain the methods it will use to identify a gang and its members. In Los Angeles, for example, prosecutors must provide a court with "clear and convincing evidence" that a group constitutes a gang and that an individual is a member.

People accused in Los Angeles of violating an injunction are provided free legal counsel, and prosecutors must prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that a defendant breached the injunction. The District's proposal, on the other hand, insists only that government lawyers prove their case by the much more lenient "preponderance of the evidence" standard; the D.C. proposal is silent on whether defendants are entitled to legal representation.