Social justice advocates react to Trump DOJ recommendation that Brett Hankison be spared from going to prison – WAVE News

Report on Justice System Developments in Louisville and Their Impact on Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A Setback for Justice and Institutional Trust

A recent recommendation by the Department of Justice (DOJ) concerning the sentencing of former Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) officer Brett Hankison has raised significant concerns among community leaders and civil rights advocates. Hankison, the only officer convicted in the 2020 case involving the death of Breonna Taylor, was found guilty of violating civil rights. The DOJ’s recommendation for no prison time is viewed as a substantial reversal in progress toward judicial reform and directly undermines key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning justice, equality, and institutional integrity.

Challenges to SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The developments in the Hankison case present a direct challenge to the principles of SDG 16, which aims to promote just, peaceful, and inclusive societies by building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels.

• Erosion of Institutional Accountability (Target 16.6): Community leaders express profound disappointment, viewing the recommendation as a failure of the justice system to hold its actors accountable. Timothy Findley Jr., a pastor and protest leader, stated, “I don’t even know if reform is really possible… justice in this system is political.” This sentiment reflects a deep-seated belief that institutions are not functioning in a transparent or accountable manner for all citizens.
• Undermining Equal Access to Justice (Target 16.3): The recommendation is perceived as a setback for equal justice. Louisville Urban League President Lyndon Pryor described the situation as “the undermining of the entire system,” warning that it could severely damage the cause of criminal and judicial reform. The family of Breonna Taylor, through their attorney Benjamin Crump, labeled the recommendation an “insult to the life of Breonna Taylor” and a move that contradicts the principle of equal justice under the law.

Implications for SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The case highlights persistent systemic issues related to racial and social inequality, a core focus of SDG 10. The reactions from community stakeholders underscore a perceived disparity in how the justice system treats different segments of the population.

• Reinforcing Inequalities of Outcome (Target 10.3): The recommendation is seen as perpetuating unequal outcomes based on race and social status. Metro Council member Shameka Parish Wright noted the disparity, stating, “I know too many people who are poor and marginalized who have done far less and gotten way more time in our Kentucky jails and prisons.”
• Setback for Social Inclusion (Target 10.2): Professor Ricky L. Jones of the University of Louisville’s Pan-African Studies department interpreted the action as a retreat from promises of social justice made in 2020. He described a “sociopolitical backlash” and stated, “this is just another message to black Louisville and black America that white power structures lied to us and cannot be trusted,” indicating a severe blow to the social inclusion and trust of minority communities.

Conclusion: Stakeholder Reactions and the Path Forward

The DOJ’s sentencing recommendation has been widely condemned by key community stakeholders as a regressive step that threatens progress on fundamental Sustainable Development Goals. The final sentencing, which rests with a federal judge, is now a critical focal point for determining the future of judicial reform and public trust in Louisville. The reactions from key figures illustrate the gravity of the situation:

1. Community Leaders: Express doubt in the possibility of meaningful reform and view the justice system as political and unconcerned with minority citizens.
2. Civil Rights Advocates: Characterize the recommendation as a setback for criminal justice reform and a threat to the integrity of the American judicial system.
3. Academic Experts: Identify the development as part of a broader racial and sociopolitical backlash, eroding trust between communities and power structures.
4. Victim’s Family: Expressed that they are “heartbroken and angry,” viewing the recommendation as a blatant disregard for the jury’s decision and a denial of lawful justice.

Relevant Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• The article extensively discusses issues of racial inequality and discrimination within the justice system. Statements like “it certainly doesn’t concern itself with minorities” and the comparison of sentences for “poor and marginalized” people versus the officer in question highlight a perceived inequality of outcome based on race and social status. This directly connects to the goal of reducing inequalities within and among countries.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• This is the most prominent SDG in the article. The entire piece revolves around the justice system, calls for “criminal justice, reform, and judicial reform,” the public’s lack of trust in institutions like the Justice Department, and the violence that occurred during the protests (“two people lost their lives”). The article questions the effectiveness, accountability, and fairness of legal and judicial institutions, which is the core focus of SDG 16.

Identified SDG Targets

1. Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices.

   • The article points to a failure to ensure equal opportunity and outcomes in the justice system. Council member Shameka Parish Wright’s comment, “I know too many people who are poor and marginalized who have done far less and gotten way more time in our Kentucky jails and prisons,” directly addresses the inequality of outcome. The call for “equal justice under the law” by Benjamin Crump further reinforces this connection.

2. Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.

   • The article begins by referencing the consequences of the initial incident and subsequent protests: “There was anger, there was violence, and two people lost their lives.” This directly relates to the target of reducing violence and death rates.

3. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and local levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

   • This target is central to the article’s theme. The disappointment expressed by community leaders stems from a perceived failure of the rule of law. Pastor Timothy Findley Jr.’s statement that “justice in this system is political” and the outrage over the sentencing recommendation for an officer convicted of “violating the civil rights of Breonna Taylor” demonstrate a crisis in ensuring equal access to justice.

4. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

   • The article highlights a deep lack of trust in institutions. The discussion of the “consent decree reforming LMPD” which was later dropped, and the criticism of the Justice Department’s recommendation, point to a need for more accountable and effective institutions. Lyndon Pryor’s comment about “the undermining of the entire system, which already is on thin ice” and Ricky L. Jones’s assertion that “white power structures lied to us and cannot be trusted” underscore the perceived failure of institutions to be accountable and transparent.

5. Target 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development.

   • The article implies that laws and policies are not being enforced in a non-discriminatory way. The sentiment that the justice system “certainly doesn’t concern itself with minorities” and that the DOJ’s recommendation is a “message to black Louisville and black America” suggests a discriminatory application of justice, which this target aims to eliminate.

Implied Indicators for Measuring Progress

1. Public perception of discrimination and fairness in the justice system.

   • The article is rich with qualitative data on this indicator. Quotes expressing that the system is “political,” doesn’t “concern itself with minorities,” and that “white power structures lied to us” serve as strong indicators of a negative public perception regarding discrimination and fairness.

2. Number of deaths related to civil unrest.

   • The article provides a specific data point for this indicator by stating, “two people lost their lives” during the protests.

3. Disparities in sentencing outcomes based on race and socioeconomic status.

   • While not providing statistics, the article implies this indicator through the anecdotal evidence provided by Shameka Parish Wright, who contrasts the potential sentence for Hankison with the “way more time” given to “poor and marginalized” individuals for lesser offenses.

4. Public trust in institutions (judiciary, police).

   • This is measured implicitly throughout the article. Statements about the justice system being on “thin ice,” the feeling of being “lied to” by power structures, and the general “outrage” and “disappointment” are clear indicators of low public trust in the relevant institutions.

Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: wave3.com