Protect and Serve? The Case of Castle Rock v. Gonzales
Police do not have a duty to protect you.
Part I in a 4-part series on the Economic Value of Whiteness
Have you noticed police vehicles no longer state “Protect and Serve”? There is a reason for that change. A 2005 Supreme Court case, Castle Rock v. Gonzales (545 U.S. 748) ruled police officers have no constitutional duty to protect civilians.
Yes, that is correct. The government organization that you have been taught, since Kindergarten, to call when in trouble, the police, has no constitutional duty to protect you. None. The only time a police officer has a duty to protect you is when you are in custody.
The Facts of Castle Rock v. Gonzales
Mrs. Gonzales who resided in Castle Rock Colorado sought out and obtained a restraining order against her husband who had been stalking her. According to the restraining order, the husband Mr. Gonzales was to stay a minimum of 100 yards from her and her children. One evening Mr. Gonzales took his three daughters in violation of their custody agreement. Mrs. Gonzales called her local police department multiple times seeking assistance to no avail. The next day, Mr. Gonzales showed up at the Castle Rock police department and dies in a shoot-out. The police later found the three dead bodies of the three daughters in Mr. Gonzales’ car. Mr. Gonzales had killed his three daughters earlier.
Mrs. Gonzales sued Castle Rock, the police department, and the individual officers claiming that she had a federally protected property interest in the enforcement of a restraining order. It was dismissed. Mrs. Gonzales appealed. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected one claim but found that she had a procedural process claim and that the officers had qualified immunity and could not be sued. The case was appealed by Castle Rock to the US Supreme Court. The Supreme Court reinstated the trial court ruling, with a majority opinion penned by Justice Scalia. He held that enforcement of a restraining order is not mandatory, and even if a mandate for enforcement existed it would not create an individual right to enforcement, and even if they could find an individual entitlement to enforcement, said enforcement had no monetary value and therefore did not count as property, therefore Mrs. Gonzales did not have any property right to enforcement of the restraining order.
In essence, the Supreme Court enshrined the concept that police only protect property and not people, which makes sense given the origins of police — slave patrols. The enslaved were legally considered chattel/property.
The Legacy of Policing in America
As with most history in America, the legacy of policing in America begins with Slavery. There are two versions of how the police started in America. Both versions are true, however, one is whitewashed and the other version includes the parts of history that often go untold.
Policing can be traced back to English policing. The idea of a centralized police department began in the early 19th century. All cities would eventually have a centralized police force. This version is very nice, in that it fails to hold White people accountable for the racist motivations that served as the catalyst for policing in America. The other half of this historical narrative is that policing in the South began as slave patrols. Arming slave patrols was the primary motivation for the Second Amendment. Slave patrols needed guns to control the enslaved population. By the end of the 18th century, every state had a slave patrol. The slave patrol was responsible for apprehending runaway slaves, deterring slave revolts, disciplining slaves for breaking rules.
Do not underestimate slave patrols. These policing units were government-sponsored, well-armed, and well-paid. Each unit was assigned a territory to protect the white community against crimes. Slave patrols did not need warrants and had full immunity. These all-white, all-male slave patrols eventually became the police. The newly formed police departments of former slave patrols were now charged with the duty of “monitoring” the behavior of freed slaves and enforcing segregation per Black Codes and Jim Crow laws.
Policing in America was never designed to protect people, but rather property. Many of you are now saying, “Don’t the police protect white people?”. Yes, they do, but that is because whiteness in America has an economic value and therefore property rights are attached. More about this topic in Part II.
Where does this leave us?
It leaves us unprotected.
The real question you should be asking now is, “If the police have no duty to protect me what do I do when I am in danger?”.
I don’t know, but I do know this is why people advocate defunding the police. A system that was established to criminalize blackness cannot simply remove this level of institutionalized racism through training or sitting through a DEI seminar.
What advocates against defunding the police fail to understand this issue isn’t just about Black folk being killed for living while Black. Castle Rock v. Gonzales was about domestic violence. A woman’s children were murdered by an abusive ex-husband. This approach to policing negatively impacts all facets of our lives.
We need to keep in mind the revered United States Constitution did not contemplate women, people of color, the LGBTQ community, the disabled, or anyone who is not white, male, and land-owning. In the words of Elie Mystal, the constitution is “actually trash” and we should consider rewriting it to incorporate all of society and not just white men.
In closing, I leave you with how The Decepticons viewed policing, “to punish and enslave”.
