This essay argues that power in the United States (US) resides in the police force. I expand on this thesis by discussing its functioning, fairness and efficiency, with relation to social consequences for society and explicitly referencing the black lives matter protest and covid because those have been the most relevant and present issues. I firstly define power. This enables me to expand on how the police have the power to provide a service with a degree of autonomy from the state. I then follow this with how the police withholding their power without presidential consent can affect individuals negatively and positively. I accept that there are limitations to power residing within the police. I conclude that it is unjust and unfair for power to be distributed this way in the US because of the significant reliance on individual judgement, especially considering that the two examples used (BLM protests and COVID-19) have been recent issues within society.
Power, as defined by Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C., is the ability to alter other’s states by providing or withholding services. Power in the US resides within the police force. The police force can uphold laws made by the federal government and president hence having more influence and making more of a difference in society. The most recent encompassing events within the US -BLM protests and Covid, show that the police have a large deposit of power that in practice can alter human actions and reactions, more so than the state’s ability to make laws. Even if laws are passed, it is up to police discretion to follow through with its implementation.
Police hold more power than governors. During the pandemic, the fine for not wearing a mask in Texas was up to two thousand dollars a day. However, in Texas, police rarely levied them. The police force said that educating the public was their primary concern rather than punishment (Phillips, 2020). This is a prime example of how the police have overridden the formal state legislature and have enacted their own rules. Due to the federalist system in the US, governors in other states have issued mask mandates as well. However, there are different approaches by police departments, e.g. Jason Johnson, president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, cited an incident in Philadelphia in which police officers were shown to be dragging a man off a bus after he refused to wear a face mask (Rosenthal, 2017). Thus, the police can use their bias to affect the lives of others; this treatment is not universal to everyone because it relies on the officer’s judgment – creating the ability to affect a person’s individual power. In the Philadelphia case, there is a lack of power for the group that doesn’t want to wear masks; however, there is an increase in power for this group in Texas. Because the US has a federalist system, states can tailor approaches. Still, practically the police have the final and most crucial power in enforcing those laws, which impact a person more.
The police have the power to make presidential commands less effective. They control public actions. In effect, they shape the decisions and risks people may take. You would not steal in a shop with high levels of security, for example. With this, it is clear that they influence people’s choices. However, in practice, due to human nature, human error can follow. Therefore, if you know that the policeman in charge of a jewellery store is incompetent, the risk of breaking the law would be lower and more within the realms of possibility. Depending on your position, this could benefit you; during the BLM protests, many police officers refused to do their job (stop violence and destruction) because they agreed with the movement. During the BLM protests, several police officers quit their jobs or refused to work, meaning they withheld their duty to serve and protect (CNN, 2020). Those officers chose to ignore the presidential instructions and facilitated those who rioted. The right to assembly (article 11) is within the constitution. However, the President has set borders for what constitutes unlawful assembly. The rioting affected the livelihoods and safety of others. Officers have criticised President Trump for his handling of BLM protests, among other policies surrounding immigration, asserting that they have the power to apprehend and ignore presidential power.
Whilst I have looked at the actions of the police after the protests, the racial bias that in effect caused the movement indicates that the police force needs reform. I argue that the mere principle that this is required displays that they hold an enormous power to drastically and directly influence people’s lives, unlike powers of the president, state and house, which may contractually and theoretically influence by creating laws. The police can choose to ratify those laws. Power distributed in this way is flawed because we do not vote in police representatives, police tests do not include moral and psychological testing, and the body is hardly routinely regulated. It is also worrying that funding can have a significant effect on the willingness to uphold justice, considering the monumental importance that the role of the police had on citizens lives. In this essay, I have emphasised the physical effects on power, but I neglect the impact that institutions can play on civil liberties, such as the right to gay marriage.
I conclude that the police hold the most power on a ground level, which for the average citizen affects their lives more. However, the flaws in power distribution are hardly overlooked due to the racial bias and unjustness of human error. I assert that the constitution and law-making bodies in the US have a degree of power, but police power is more shaping in society.