The Washington Post - USA (2022-05-24)

A8 EZ SU THE WASHINGTON POST.TUESDAY, MAY 24 , 2022

BY MARIANNA SOTOMAYOR

AND COLBY ITKOWITZ

Democrats unexpectedly
breathed a sigh of relief earlier
this year when it became clear
that newly redrawn congres-
sional districts would give them
a slight competitive edge over
the next decade. But their worry
sharply returned this month as
favorable maps in Florida and
New York were struck down and
replaced with district lines that
are likely to make it even more
difficult to keep their already
slim majority in the House.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R)
vetoed the maps passed by the
state legislature and pressed for
one favorable to the GOP by
erasing a Black-majority district
around Jacksonville. In New
York, a judge approved a widely
disputed map early Saturday
that, if upheld, would lead to
Democrats losing at least one
colleague amid an internal party
fight this past week over who was
to blame and who would run
where.
In a good year, Democrats
could win two more seats than
they have now, but in a difficult
year, as 2022 is expected to be,
they could lose as many as three.
In the November midterm elec-
tion, Republicans need to net
only five seats to regain the
House majority, a possibility that
is likely given the historic trend
of a first-term president’s party
losing in the midterm election.
Even with the map changes
this month, independent ana-
lysts say that Democrats remain
competitive nationwide after
adding three new districts more
favorable to President Biden vs.
the current lines that were
drawn in 2010. Redistricting,
however, has eliminated 18 com-
petitive seats according to a
Washington Post analysis, mak-
ing it less likely that either party
can have more of an edge in
future races.
Democrats were hoping that
new congressional maps, espe-
cially in predominantly blue
states like New York, could make
up for likely losses in swing
districts. Democratic leaders in
states like California, Colorado
and Oregon established inde-
pendent commissions to more
transparently draw new district
lines that they hoped would be
less partisan and more represen-
tative — but doing so seems to
have put the party at a disadvan-
tage given that Republicans in

several states, including DeSan-

tis, were still determined to draw

maps as favorably as possible for

their party.

The courts have been a check

on those sorts of efforts, and

Democrats notched some early

wins — which have since been

reversed. Alabama Republicans

persuaded the Supreme Court to

override a lower court’s ruling

that would have forced the state

to draw two congressional dis-

tricts with large Black voting

blocs. Ohio Republicans, whose

congressional map has repeated-

ly been ruled by the state Su-

preme Court an unconstitutional

gerrymander, are still being al-

lowed to use it for this year’s

elections.

Democrats in both Florida and

New York say they got a raw deal,

though for different reasons.

The Florida Senate in January

agreed on a map that both par-

ties determined was fair and

wouldn’t be challenged in court.

But DeSantis, days before the

vote, threw the process into cha-

os by presenting his own version,

which drastically altered dis-

tricts at the expense of Black

voters.

The Florida House then drew

new lines intended to appease

DeSantis, dramatically shrinking

a majority Black district that ran

across the state’s entire northern

border — currently represented

by Democratic Rep. Al Lawson —

to a smaller one surrounding

Jacksonville. DeSantis vetoed

both maps, and the legislature

eventually passed a map drawn

by the governor.

A GOP-appointed circuit court

judge recently ruled that Law-

son’s seat should be reinstated,

which DeSantis appealed. On

Friday, a Florida appellate court

reinstated DeSantis’s map, elimi-

nating the district once again.

“[DeSantis] said he didn’t

think that race should be consid-

ered, but those maps ended up

tearing communities in half. And

that violated our fair districting

standards. So he really sought to

put his thumb on the scales

here,” Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.)

said.

While the overall map is less

favorable to Democrats, Rep.

Darren Soto (D) — who is from

the Orlando area — said Demo-

crats can still be competitive

over the next decade given that

seats in the Tampa Bay and

Miami areas remain swing dis-

tricts.

The real drama is playing out

in New York, where ample time

was given to propose maps.

Many New York Democrats are

angry with Rep. Sean Patrick

Maloney (D-N.Y.) as well as Jona-

than Cervas, a redistricting ex-

pert and the “special master”

who drew the latest map, which

initially placed eight Democrats’

homes outside their current dis-

tricts and forced two member-

on-member primaries.

In 2014, New York voters over-

whelmingly passed a ballot ini-

tiative intended to make redis-

tricting less partisan. It set up a

10-member advisory commis-

sion outside the legislature to

draw maps for state lawmakers

to approve.

But the setup was deeply

flawed, voting rights advocates

have argued, because the com-

mission could be overruled by

the legislature and was com-

posed of an equal number of

Democrats and Republicans, cre-

ating a deadlock. The commis-

sioners, most appointed by state

politicians, ended up entrenched

in their own partisan stalemate

and never were able to agree on

one map to send to Albany.

So, the state Democrats —

with control over all of govern-

ment for the first time in 100

years — took the reins and drew a

map that removed a district and

could have grown their congres-

sional delegation by as many as

three seats.

The state’s high court struck

down the congressional lines,

ruling them invalid because the

constitution directed the advi-

sory commission to first draw

the maps. The judges also found

the map to be overly partisan.

A senior New York Democratic

official, who spoke on the condi-

tion of anonymity to talk candid-

ly, said the “courts hijacked the

redistricting process.” The Dem-

ocrat scoffed at complaints that

the legislature’s gerrymander

was too extreme and thus ex-

posed it to a legal challenge. The

Democratic Congressional Cam-

paign Committee (DCCC) had

publicly suggested a version that

was more partisan than the one

the New York Democrats ulti-

mately drew, the state official

said.

“Our delegation was thrilled

with us and wanted us to go

further, we were getting pats on

the backs and hurrahs,” the Dem-

ocrat said. “I promise you no one

was suggesting we be less aggres-

sive.”

New York congressional Dem-

ocrats were seething at the out-

come, calling it a racist gerry-

mander because it breaks up

communities of color, diluting

Latino communities and forcing

Black members to determine

where to run, they said. Many

groups, including the DCCC, sub-

mitted letters making these

points for the Steuben County

Supreme Court to consider be-

fore its final decision issued

Friday. That appears to have had

some influence by rejoining

some minority neighborhoods

that were split in Monday’s pro-

posed map and moving some

members’ residences back into

their districts.

“The iconic neighborhood of

Bedford Stuyvesant has been

restored to its rightful place in

Central Brooklyn. But severe

problems remain with histori-

cally Black, Latino and Jewish

districts throughout New York

City,” House Democratic Caucus

Chairman Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.)

said in a tweet Saturday. “Stay

tuned.”

In a statement issued by the

DCCC on Saturday, Maloney ac-

cused the judge of unfair bias

that favored Republicans, saying

Democrats “will continue fight-

ing to get fair maps that reflect

the will of the voters of New

York.” Court proceedings, howev-

er, could take months, making it

incredibly difficult to enact final-

ized maps during this election.

The approved map also pits

Reps. Carolyn B. Maloney

(D-N.Y.) and Jerrold Nadler

(D-N.Y.) against each other, two

members from Manhattan who

serve as the top Democrats on

high-ranking committees.

A decision made by Rep. Mon-

daire Jones (D-N.Y.) to run in

another district may have

quelled tensions between law-

makers that permeated this past

week in Washington. Sean Pat-

rick Maloney declared Monday

that he would run in the pro-

posed 17th District, challenging

Jones, saying that he does not

want to uproot his family from

their home, which is based with-

in the current district lines. His

children are of college age, and

one commutes to school from

home.

“I’m just running where I

landed,” Maloney said at a news

conference Tuesday. “If someone

else is looking at the district as

well, obviously we’ll try and work

through that as colleagues and

friends. Ultimately this is up to

the voters, and that’s what it

should be.”

His allies defended Maloney’s

decision, noting he was better

suited for the district because

Jones, a member of the Congres-

sional Progressive Caucus, is too

liberal to represent the area. The

current lines encompass roughly

75 percent of the district Jones

won in 2020.

In response to such assertions,

Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.)

tweeted Wednesday: “The thinly

veiled racism here is profoundly

disappointing. A black man is

ideologically ill suited to repre-

sent a Westchester County Dis-

trict that he represents presently

and won decisively in 2020?

Outrageous.”

Maloney’s decision inflamed

tensions within the House Dem-

ocratic caucus, with many mem-

bers privately musing whether

he could lead as DCCC chairman

— whose role is to protect the

majority — while also challeng-

ing a member who could lose his

seat. Several members and aides

pondered whether it would be

possible to recall Maloney be-

cause he was elected by members

to the position.

In a scathing statement Thurs-

day, Rep. Jamaal Bowman

(D-N.Y.) directly blamed Malo-

ney for seeking “a slightly easier

district for himself” as a reason

“two Black men who worked

hard to represent their commu-

nities” could be pitted against

each other, had Jones decided to

run in the 16th Congressional

District.

“The solution is simple. Con-

gressman Maloney should run in

his own district. I’ll be running

in mine,” he said.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca-

lif.) defended Maloney at a news

conference Thursday, telling re-

porters she remains “very proud”

of him and declining to get

involved in any of the races.

Several House members pri-

vately expressed their frustration

toward leaders, particularly

Pelosi, for not twisting some

members’ arms about whether

it’s worth challenging certain

incumbents.

Jones made a surprising an-

nouncement shortly after the

judge’s finalized map was made

public: Rather than defend his

home turf in the Hudson Valley

from Maloney, Jones said he has

decided to seek reelection in the

new 10th Congressional District,

which envelopes Lower Manhat-

tan and parts of liberal Brooklyn.

He will face former New York

mayor Bill de Blasio in the pri-

mary, after he announced a run

Friday.

“This is the birthplace of the

LGBTQ+ rights movement. Since

long before the Stonewall Upris-

ing, queer people of color have

sought refuge within its borders,”

tweeted Jones, who is Black, gay

and widely considered a rising

star in the party. “I’m excited to

make my case for why I’m the

right person to lead this district.”

House Democrats scramble after losing redistricting battles

ALEX WONG/GETTY IMAGES

R ep. Sean Patrick Maloney (N.Y.), chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee,

inflamed party tensions by deciding to run in the proposed 17th District.

Favorable maps in Fla.,

N.Y. were struck down,

hurting competitive edge

BY DEVLIN BARRETT

The Justice Department has up-
dated its use-of-force policy for the
first time in 18 years, telling feder-
al agents they have a duty to inter-
vene if they see other law enforce-
ment officials using excessive
force — a change that follows years
of protests over police killings.
The new policy is outlined in a
memo issued Friday by Attorney
General Merrick Garland, which cir-
culated Monday among rank-and-
file federal law enforcement agents.
The Washington Post reviewed
a copy of the four-page memo ad-
dressed to the heads of the FBI, the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Fire-
arms and Explosives, the Drug En-
forcement Administration, the
U.S. Marshals Service and the Bu-
reau of Prisons. Garland wrote in

the memo that the guidance aims

to keep the official policies of those

agencies, which are arms of the

Justice Department, up to date

with current training and practic-

es of federal law enforcement.

“Officers will be trained in, and

must recognize and act upon, the

affirmative duty to intervene to

prevent or stop, as appropriate,

any officer from engaging in exces-

sive force or any other use of force

that violates the Constitution, oth-

er federal laws, or Department

policies on the reasonable use of

force,” the memo states.

The policy, which is slated to

take effect July 19, does not com-

pel state and local police — or

federal law enforcement agencies

outside the Justice Department —

to follow a similar standard.

The “duty to intervene” language

grew out of recommendations

made years ago by law enforcement

groups. The change comes nearly

two years after the 2020 death of

George Floyd, a Minneapolis man

who died under the knee of a local

police officer, as other officers

watched. Before Friday, the Justice

Department’s use-of-force policy

had not been updated since 2004.

Garland’s memo makes clear

that federal law enforcement offi-

cers also have a duty to act if they

see someone who needs medical

care, stating: “Officers will be

trained in, and must recognize and

act upon, the affirmative duty to

request and/or render medical aid,

as appropriate, where needed.”

Larry Cosme, president of the

Federal Law Enforcement Officers

Association, said the policy did

not arise out of any particular

incident but was rather a part of a

larger, longer effort to update

rules and guidelines for federal

law enforcement.

“It’s the modernization of polic-

ing, and you need to update pol-

icies to reflect what’s going on in

our country,” Cosme said. “Every

officer that’s a good officer is al-

ways going to try to do their jobs to

the best of their ability, and this

reinforces what the men and

women in federal law enforce-

ment are already doing.”

More broadly, the memo spells

out what the Justice Department

believes are best practices for law

enforcement, repeating past guid-

ance that officers should not fire

their weapons at people solely be-

cause they are fleeing, nor fire into

vehicles solely to make them stop.

The policy also says that deadly

force should not be used “against

persons whose actions are a threat

solely to themselves or property

unless an individual poses an im-

minent danger of death or serious

physical injury to the officer or

others in close proximity.”

The tone of Garland’s memo is

also a departure from the 2004 ver-

sion, which states, in simple, shorter

language, that officers “may use

deadly force only when necessary,

that is, when the officer has a reason-

able belief that the subject of such

force poses an imminent danger of

death or serious physical injury to

the officer or to another person.”

Garland’s memo, by contrast,

declares: “It is the policy of the

Department of Justice to value and

preserve human life. Officers may

use only the force that is objectively

reasonable to effectively gain con-

trol of an incident, while protecting

the safety of the officer and others.”

“Officers may use force only

when no reasonably effective,

safe, and feasible alternative ap-

pears to exist and may use only the

level of force that a reasonable

officers on the scene would use

under the same or similar circum-

stances,” the memo states.

Echoing new priorities among a

great many law enforcement agen-

cies, the Garland memo also encour-

ages officers and agents to prioritize

de-escalating confrontations, and to

undergo training “in de-escalation

tactics and techniques designed to

gain voluntary compliance from a

subject before using force, and such

tactics and techniques should be

employed if objectively feasible and

they would not increase the danger

to the officer or others.”

Justice Dept. policy update: Agents have duty to intervene if they see abuse

BY DANIELLE

DOUGLAS-GABRIEL

Princeton University’s board of
trustees voted Monday to fire
Joshua Katz, a tenured professor
in the classics department, for fail-
ing to fully cooperate with a sexu-
al-misconduct investigation that
his supporters say is retaliation for
his viewpoints.
Katz sparked controversy for a
2020 essay opposing faculty pro-
posals to combat racism at the
university after the murder of
George Floyd. The backlash
against his piece vaulted him to
star status among some conserva-
tives who viewed the reaction as
an attack on free speech. Amid the
attention, allegations of Katz, 52,
having an improper relationship
with a female student resurfaced,
leading to a university investiga-
tion that has now led to his dis-
missal.
The board sided with Princeton

President Christopher L. Eisgru-

ber and faculty dean Gene A. Jar-

rett, who both recommended Katz

be terminated for withholding in-

formation in a 2018 investigation

into his relationship with an un-

dergraduate a decade earlier.

Katz did not immediately re-

spond to requests for comment on

Monday. His attorney, Samantha

Harris, declined to say whether

Katz is will take legal action but

said he is keeping all of his options

open.

“Princeton is going to say this

had nothing to do with his politi-

cal speech and this was a com-

pletely new investigation,” Harris

said. “But I don’t think there is a

person out there who genuinely

doubts that if Professor Katz had

not published his article in 2020

that he would be employed by

Princeton.”

Katz had previously admitted

to having a consensual sexual rela-

tionship with the student, who did

not participate in the original 2018

investigation. He was suspended

without pay for a year for violating

school policy banning sexual rela-

tionships between faculty and stu-

dents, and placed on three years’

probation.

The relationship drew new

scrutiny in February 2021 after the

student newspaper, the Daily

Princetonian, wrote about it as

part of a lengthy investigation of

sexual harassment accusations

against Katz. Later that month,

the former student filed a com-

plaint with the university that

spawned another investigation.

According to Princeton, the for-

mer student provided new infor-

mation unknown to the university

in 2018. Investigators allege that

Katz discouraged her from partici-

pating and cooperating in the

original probe after she shared

with him that she would. They also

allege that Katz discouraged the

student from seeking counseling

through the university health ser-

vices to allegedly prevent the uni-

versity from learning about his

conduct.

“These actions were not only

egregious violations of University

policy, but also entirely inconsis-

tent with his obligations as a mem-

ber of the faculty,” Princeton wrote

in a statement issued Monday.

Harris, Katz’s attorney, said the

university’s actions could have a

chilling effect on free speech on

college campuses.

“The message to other people

who might want to speak out is the

price is having your personal life

turned inside-out looking for in-

formation to destroy you,” Harris

said. This is “someone who was

previously an award-winning,

highly respected professor, but

from the moment he published

that article onward he became a

relentless target until he was

fired.”

Jarrett, the faculty dean,

pushed back against the assertion

that Katz’s views were the catalyst

for the investigation in a Novem-

ber report on the probe, saying

“the current political climate of

the university, whether perceived

or real, is not germane to the case.”

Katz stirred up tensions on

campus after a group of faculty,

students and graduates signed an

open letter in July 2020 demand-

ing Princeton atone for the legacy

of racism on campus by address-

ing bias in hiring and admissions.

Katz penned an essay days later

saying the letter was an embar-

rassment to the faculty who

signed it and arguing that their

demands “would lead to civil war

on campus.”

He also criticized a now-de-

funct student group, the Black

Justice League, that advocated for

the removal of former president

Woodrow Wilson’s name from a

campus building. Katz called the

group “a small local terrorist or-

ganization.”

Eisgruber criticized Katz’s char-

acterization of the student organi-

zation as “irresponsible and offen-

sive,” but asserted the professor’s

views “can be answered but not

censored or sanctioned.”

On Saturday, Eisgruber reiter-

ated his commitment to freedom

of speech before an audience of

graduates at an event on the

Princeton campus. While Eisgru-

ber declined to discuss Katz’s case,

he stressed that Princeton faculty

must treat students appropriately

and be honest.

“We take those rules very seri-

ously here and we believe that a

faculty member is bound by those

obligations, regardless of how dis-

tinguished they may be, and re-

gardless of what their political

views may be,” Eisgruber said. “Po-

litical views aren’t a reason to in-

vestigate anybody. They’re also

not a defense for investigating

anybody.”

Princeton board votes to fire professor in sexual-misconduct investigation