Criminal Justice

Subterms

    Latest story

    125 Shares99 Views

    Mayor Adams Clashes With City Council Speaker on NYC’s Path

    by

    Adrienne Adams, the speaker of the City Council, has become one of Mayor Eric Adams’s most powerful critics as he struggles with crises and low approval ratings.As Mayor Eric Adams battles low poll ratings, a federal investigation and potential challengers to his re-election in New York City, a Democratic ally has emerged as an unexpected adversary: Adrienne Adams, the City Council speaker.Ms. Adams, who shares many of the mayor’s moderate stances, has become one of his most powerful and vocal critics, unifying the most diverse City Council ever and empowering it as a forceful wedge against him.On Tuesday, Ms. Adams led the Council in overriding the mayor’s vetoes of a bill banning the use of solitary confinement in the city’s jails and another bill requiring police officers to record the race, age and gender of most people they stop.The actions were an unusual rebuke of a New York City mayor by his Democratic colleagues: It was only the second time in nearly a decade that the Council has overridden a mayor’s veto.When she was chosen as Council speaker in 2022, Ms. Adams was seen as a compromise candidate, a moderate Democrat who could work with Mayor Adams without being beholden to him. But in recent months, she has begun to regularly play the role of political antagonist to the mayor.She has questioned Mr. Adams’s management of the budget and criticized his approach to handling the influx of migrants as inhumane. She prompted the Council to pass the bills banning solitary confinement and improving police accountability, despite the mayor’s objections, and carried enough support to override his vetoes.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

    More stories

    • 163 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Los Angeles D.A. Gascón Is Running for Re-election in a Very Different Climate

      by

      George Gascón is running for re-election in a very different climate, where concerns about crime have overtaken demands for equity and accountability.Three years ago, George Gascón rode a wave of collective outrage following the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis to become district attorney of Los Angeles by promising to make the criminal justice system fairer and, most crucially, to rein in the police.Now, to win re-election and stay in office, Mr. Gascón will need to tap into a different type of emotion: fear — in particular a perception that Los Angeles is less safe and that his policies as district attorney have made it so, an argument advanced by many of his challengers but largely unsupported by data. “I think that this race now for 2024 has gone back to, for a lot of people, law and order, lock ’em up,” Mr. Gascón said in an interview. Mr. Gascón’s victory in 2020 was one of the most consequential electoral outcomes from the movement for social justice and police accountability galvanized by Mr. Floyd’s murder by a Minneapolis police officer. And for the national movement that in recent years has helped elect progressive prosecutors in jurisdictions across the country, the victory in Los Angeles was momentous: The county has the nation’s largest prosecution office, the largest jail system and a long history of police abuses.But Mr. Gascón, 69, is running for re-election in a very different political climate. Demands for equity and accountability in policing and prosecution have been overtaken by concerns about what to do about crime — the question that has dominated the district’s attorney’s race in Los Angeles. “I think that this race now for 2024 has gone back to, for a lot of people, law and order, lock ‘em up,” Mr. Gascón said in an interview. Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesThe 11 candidates challenging Mr. Gascón include judges, attorneys in his own office and former federal prosecutors, nearly all to varying degrees running to the right of Mr. Gascón.“Yes, crime is up,” Jonathan McKinney, a prosecutor in Mr. Gascón’s office who is among the challengers, told the crowd at a debate this fall hosted by the Santa Monica Democratic Club. “That’s why you’re all here tonight.” The first round of the election is in March, and if no candidate receives more than 50 percent of the vote — unlikely given the low numbers each candidate is currently polling at — the top two candidates will face each other in November.Even as Mr. Gascón’s opponents paint a picture of out-of-control crime, the data indicates that Los Angeles, like much of the country, is becoming safer in crucial categories of violent crime, such as murder, as the social and economic disruptions of pandemic recede. In the city of Los Angeles, which accounts for about 40 percent of the population of Los Angeles County, most violent crimes are down substantially compared to 2021, Mr. Gascón’s first year in office. Murder, often a proxy for people’s wider views on crime, is down about 18 percent, while rape is down close to 19 percent. But property crimes, including burglary and car theft, have risen, the only crime tracked by the F.B.I. that has gone up in 2023.Back in 2020, progressives like Mr. Gascón often tried to use data to persuade voters concerned about crime that their feelings didn’t always match reality.This time, he is taking a different approach.“We can talk to people about data, and that doesn’t really resonate,” he said. “So I gave up on talking about data. I’ll throw it in there to sprinkle, but I immediately try to connect with people on a human level. Acknowledging their feelings, because their feelings are real.”Three years ago, Mr. Gascón rode a wave of outrage following the murder of George Floyd to become district attorney by promising to make the criminal justice system fairer.Bryan Denton for The New York TimesMr. Gascón is facing opposition not only from candidates to the right of him, accusing him of making Los Angeles less safe and failing to take a tough stance on crime, but also from liberal-minded voters who are either worried about crime or have become disenchanted by his policies. Growing up in Los Angeles, Mauricio Caamal says he was routinely harassed by the police. He was also a victim of crime when he was 4 years old, and his father was robbed and murdered in downtown L.A.When 2020 came around, and the nation convulsed with protests over the murder of Mr. Floyd, Mr. Caamal was drawn to the streets over a police killing closer to home: A sheriff’s deputy in Los Angeles shot Andres Guardado, an 18-year-old security guard, five times in the back, killing him. Mr. Caamal, 32, embraced the calls to defund the police, and supported Mr. Gascón. Mr. Gascón first rose to prominence as an assistant police chief in Los Angeles in the mid-2000s. More than a decade later, after serving as the police chief in San Francisco and then winning two terms as that city’s district attorney, he returned to Los Angeles to run for district attorney there. In office, Mr. Gascón has pursued dozens of cases against police officers, a rarity under his predecessor. But earlier this year, after a long investigation, he declined to bring charges against the deputy in Mr. Guardado’s case, determining there was “insufficient evidence” to support charges.“I think that, on its own, should be enough for me not to vote for him again,” Mr. Caamal said.Mr. Gascón beat back an early effort to recall him from office, which was supported by some prosecutors who work for him, after his opponents failed to secure enough signatures to force a new election. That allowed him to avoid the fate of his counterpart in San Francisco, Chesa Boudin, who was recalled last year amid an acrimonious debate in that city about property crimes and visible squalor in the streets.At a meeting of the San Fernando Valley Young Democrats, Mr. Gascón, right, talks with Walter García, a candidate for the California State Assembly,Jenna Schoenefeld for The New York TimesTo win another term, Mr. Gascón says he must hone his message to connect reforms with public safety by arguing, for instance, that second chances and more lenient sentences reduce recidivism and improve safety over the long haul.“You cannot really have sustainable public safety if you don’t address the inequities in the system,” he said. He added, “So it’s a much more nuanced campaign in the sense that we have to, even to get to the same place, we have to go through a process of explaining a lot more” the connection between reform and public safety.“I feel less safe since he’s been there,” said Karim Bailey, 42, a middle-school teacher in South Los Angeles whose classroom discussions often center on neighborhood crime and policing. He has had his car’s catalytic converter stolen twice.Mr. Bailey said he couldn’t recall which candidate he voted for in 2020 but that he would not be supporting Mr. Gascón this time.“A lot of the cases that I’ve seen that have involved him, it just seems like he puts the interest of the criminal over the interest of the general public,” he said.In 2020, Maria-Isabel Rutledge knocked on doors for Mr. Gascón’s campaign. She is supporting him again this time around, arguing that he needs more time to carry out reforms she believes are necessary to make the system fairer.Ms. Rutledge, 70, is a retired teacher’s assistant and lives in South Central Los Angeles, the epicenter of the uprising in 1992 after the acquittal of several police officers in the beating of Rodney King.“I know that, if he continues in the same trajectory, that he’s going, hopefully, to be able to make change,” she said of Mr. Gascón. “It’s difficult and challenging to reform the dated institutionally racist system,” she said. “The system of racism is very, very embedded in the United States, but we have to keep going in the right direction, we have to keep chipping at it a little bit at a time.” More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Pardon Recipients Seek to Sell Trump on His Own Sentencing Law

      by

      The Republican front-runner has a history of making racist statements, but some advisers think highlighting his signature law could help increase support among Black voters and potentially swing the election.In early July, former President Donald J. Trump received a somewhat unlikely visitor at his golf club and estate in Bedminster, N.J.: Michael Harris, the founder of Death Row Records, who had been imprisoned for drug trafficking and attempted murder, came to meet privately with the man who had pardoned him.Mr. Harris was connected to the former president by Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and daughter Ivanka Trump, who had helped push him as a pardon candidate, according to two people familiar with the process. The couple were staying at Mr. Trump’s club at Bedminster when the meeting took place, and Mr. Kushner joined, two people briefed on the matter said.But their lunch served another purpose for some people close to Mr. Trump: Mr. Harris is the type of high-profile Black celebrity that some Trump associates hope will next year highlight the former president’s signature criminal justice reform law, the First Step Act, which was one of Mr. Kushner’s key priorities during his time as an adviser in the White House.Although Mr. Harris is not a beneficiary of the sentencing law, having received his pardon on Mr. Trump’s last full day in office after serving decades in prison as part of a series of clemency grants, he has nonetheless become an evangelist for it.Mr. Trump, who has shown gains among Black voters in some recent polls, is hoping to win a slightly larger margin than he has in the past, with the potential to swing key states. He has been indicted four times, a fact that his advisers and allies insist — without offering any evidence — will somehow be helpful with Black voters because he asserts that he’s a victim of overzealous prosecution. (He has also repeatedly called the three Black prosecutors investigating him “racist.”)But some of his closest allies who have been trying to impress on him the value of boasting his own record on the issue insist that he has absorbed their message, though it is unclear whether that’s true or more of a projection of their own wishes.Mr. Harris declined to discuss what took place in their meeting, but he expressed gratitude toward the Trump administration in a statement and praised the sentencing law. “The passing of the First Step Act and similar initiatives surrounding” criminal justice reform “has provided much needed relief for so many deserving individuals and families,” he said.An aide to Mr. Kushner and a spokesman for Mr. Trump did not respond to requests for comment.Not everyone around the former president believes that he should highlight the First Step Act, which Mr. Trump himself soured on soon after signing it. Mr. Trump, who is often influenced by what he thinks his core voters want, felt affirmed in that view after a number of hard-core Republicans began to criticize it in 2021 and 2022 amid a rise in crime. Some of his conservative associates, who see the bill as problematic with Republicans, said privately that they were unhappy that he had met with Mr. Harris.While the issue poses a potential challenge for Mr. Trump’s team, the discussions also underscore a broader challenge for President Biden’s team heading into 2024: how to pin down an opponent who has a four-year record as well as decades’ worth of statements on almost every issue that are contradictory.Michael Harris, the founder of Death Row Records, was pardoned on Mr. Trump’s last full day in office.Chris Pizzello/Invision, via Associated PressMr. Trump has a long history of making racist statements, including attacking a judge’s Mexican heritage; calling for the death penalty for the teenagers who were arrested and later coerced into giving confessions in a case of brutal rape in Central Park in 1989; telling a group of congresswomen of color — almost all of whom were born in the United States — to go back to their countries; and, perhaps most famously, insisting that the first Black president might not have been born in the United States.He has also grown increasingly violent in his rhetoric about crime in America, saying that he admires the freedom that despots have to execute drug dealers and that shoplifters should be shot on the spot.At the same time, he has made clear that he viewed the law, which, among other things, sought to reduce mandatory minimum sentences for some crimes, as something that should have won him support from Black voters.“Did it for African Americans,” he wrote to this reporter for a book in 2022 when asked about his repeated expressions of regret about the law. “Nobody else could have gotten it done. Got zero credit.”But the Democratic coalition of Black, Latino and younger voters has frayed since Mr. Biden’s victory, with Mr. Trump picking up support from those groups. And one difficulty in holding Mr. Trump to account is that he often has a contradictory set of words and actions that different people can latch onto.And the bipartisan First Step Act, which Mr. Trump signed in December 2018, is one part of his record that some of his allies believe they can use in 2024 to downplay his strongman rhetoric and actions around race and violence.“Trump was both bloodthirsty in his rhetoric but signed the First Step Act, which was significant sentencing reform,” said Michael Waldman, the president and chief executive of the Brennan Center for Justice, who also served in the White House during Bill Clinton’s presidency. “Whether he truly believed in it or not, he did it.”While Gov. Ron DeSantis, Republican of Florida, attacked Mr. Trump over the law, calling it a “jailbreak” bill despite voting for an early version of it, his criticisms didn’t dent Mr. Trump’s support. And Republican criticisms of the law have become more muted as the party has coalesced around him.Both praising the legislation and making racist statements would be in keeping with Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign, which was a mix of demagoguing immigrants and small-time criminals, using law-and-order rhetoric, and accusing Hillary Clinton of racism against Black men.It is also far from the only issue on which Mr. Trump has decades of action and statements he can point to that allow different people to read what they want into his behavior, and will happily play to whatever audience he’s in front of.Other than Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican majority leader, no person is more responsible than Mr. Trump, who gave the Supreme Court its 6-3 conservative majority, for overturning the landmark decision that recognized abortion rights as constitutionally protected. Yet, Mr. Trump called a six-week abortion ban signed by Mr. DeSantis a “terrible mistake,” and has refused to be specific about a national ban. That has alarmed Democrats, who worry he will try to appear moderate on the issue in a general election race against Mr. Biden.More recently, some of Mr. Biden’s allies watched angrily as the Spanish-language network Univision, which Mr. Trump has attacked in the past but now has new ownership, gave the former president a relatively soft interview, one that Mr. Kushner arranged, and minimized pushback from Mr. Biden’s team.It remains to be seen how willing Mr. Trump will be, if at all, to speak about the criminal justice law, or whether Mr. Harris might be asked to speak publicly.The same week that Mr. Harris met with Mr. Trump, the former president received a call from Alice Johnson, whose life sentence on charges related to cocaine possession and money laundering was commuted after a meeting between Mr. Trump and the celebrity Kim Kardashian. Ms. Johnson was the person who recommended to Mr. Kushner and Ms. Trump that Mr. Harris be granted clemency.“My whole conversation was just encouragement” about the criminal justice reform bill, said Ms. Johnson, who spoke at the Republican National Convention in 2020 and was pardoned by Mr. Trump a short time later. She said no one had asked her to call him or engage in politics for him next year. But, she added, “he actually is proud of that piece of legislation.” More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Ecuador está en crisis, pero hay maneras de salir

      by

      Pedro Briones, candidato al Congreso y líder político en Ecuador, fue asesinado el lunes. El ataque se produjo a unos días de que Fernando Villavicencio, candidato presidencial y firme crítico de la corrupción, fuera asesinado al salir de un mitin de campaña en Quito, la capital del país. Las muertes, tan cercanas a las elecciones generales de Ecuador previstas para el domingo, han conmocionado a los ecuatorianos y han suscitado la condena mundial. La ola de violencia demuestra que nadie, ni siquiera un candidato presidencial, está a salvo en Ecuador.Christian Zurita, periodista de investigación, excolega y amigo cercano de Villavicencio, será su reemplazo en la contienda. Y aunque lo que sucederá el domingo es incierto, algo está claro: la intensa polarización política de Ecuador no ayudará a resolver esta crisis.El homicidio de Briones está siendo investigado y seis ciudadanos colombianos fueron detenidos en conexión con el homicidio de Villavicencio. La manera en que el sistema de justicia penal ecuatoriano gestione las investigaciones en curso será una prueba de fuego para el país.Los políticos ecuatorianos y sus aliados internacionales deberán reunir la voluntad política y los recursos necesarios para llevar a cabo una investigación seria e independiente de los asesinatos. Si las autoridades se limitan a procesar a unos cuantos sicarios y dejan las cosas como están, las organizaciones criminales se atreverán a más. Pero si toman el camino más largo y difícil —descubrir y llevar ante la justicia a los autores intelectuales de los homicidios y sacar a la luz los vínculos del crimen organizado con partes del Estado—, puede que el país tenga una vía para no caer en el abismo.Como politólogo especializado en América Latina, he vivido y trabajado en países como Colombia y Guatemala, donde hace décadas las pandillas y los grupos de delincuencia organizada empezaron a sembrar el caos a medida que se hacían más poderosos. Aunque Ecuador había logrado eludir la violencia impulsada por el narcotráfico y los conflictos armados internos que asolaron a sus vecinos sudamericanos durante la segunda mitad del siglo XX, tiene todas las características para convertirse en un paraíso para los narcotraficantes. El país se encuentra ubicado entre Perú y Colombia, los dos mayores productores de hoja de coca en el mundo. Además, desde el año 2000, la economía ecuatoriana usa dólares como moneda legal, lo que la hace atractiva para el lavado de dinero.La desmovilización en 2017 de las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (Farc), que durante mucho tiempo controlaron las rutas de narcotráfico ecuatorianas, creó un vacío que los nuevos cárteles y pandillas intentan llenar. A principios de este año, fui testigo de cómo la violencia está reescribiendo las reglas de la vida cotidiana ecuatoriana. La tasa de homicidios de Ecuador es ahora la cuarta más alta de América Latina y la extorsión ha aumentado a un ritmo alarmante. Como consecuencia, las calles, antes llenas de vida, lucen inquietantemente vacías y los comercios han empezado a cerrar más temprano. Un día, vi cómo un comerciante y sus clientes se agolpaban alrededor de un teléfono para ver y aplaudir videos de justicia por mano propia contra presuntos pandilleros. Muchas personas con las que hablé me contaron que planeaban migrar. Desde octubre, más de 77.000 ecuatorianos han llegado a la frontera entre México y Estados Unidos, un aumento de casi ocho veces desde 2020.Los desatinos políticos han dejado a Ecuador mal equipado para hacer frente a la espiral de violencia. Rafael Correa, presidente entre 2007 y 2017, cometió los primeros errores importantes. Es cierto que algunas medidas implementadas por su gobierno ayudaron a reducir los homicidios a niveles bajos. Pero Correa también eliminó la unidad policial de investigaciones especiales, cerró una base militar estadounidense que suministraba equipo para vigilar su espacio aéreo y sus vastas aguas territoriales y duplicó la población carcelaria, lo que creó un caldo de cultivo para las pandillas. Sus sucesores también cometieron errores garrafales.Durante el gobierno del expresidente Lenín Moreno funcionarios en los poderes ejecutivo y judicial que habían sido nombrados por Correa fueron destituidos, y un referendo reinstauró los límites a los mandatos presidenciales eliminados por su predecesor. El poder judicial abrió investigaciones por corrupción durante los años de Correa y la polarización estalló entre los correístas, que afirmaban ser víctimas de una justicia politizada, y sus opositores, como Moreno, que sostenían que estaban reconstruyendo los pesos y contrapesos democráticos erosionados durante la presidencia de su antecesor. Mientras se gestaba esta lucha política, las pandillas convirtieron las cárceles sobrepobladas en sus centros de mando y empezaron a infiltrarse en las instituciones gubernamentales y las fuerzas armadas.Guillermo Lasso, el actual presidente, libra una batalla con los seguidores de Correa en la Asamblea Nacional, que Lasso disolvió por decreto en mayo. También ha decretado diversos estados de emergencia e incluso desplegó soldados en las calles para combatir a las pandillas y los carteles. Sin embargo, el control de los grupos criminales sobre el país solo ha aumentado. Resulta inquietante que el cuñado de Lasso, quien fue uno de sus asesores cercanos, esté siendo investigado por presuntos vínculos con la mafia albanesa. En marzo, un empresario implicado en el caso fue encontrado muerto.Un simpatizante mostrando un volante de Villavicencio durante una protesta un día después del asesinato del candidato.Carlos Noriega/Associated PressEl auge de la delincuencia en Ecuador es transnacional, pues los cárteles mexicanos, grupos colombianos y venezolanos, así como la mafia albanesa compiten por controlar el narcotráfico en el país y debilitar al Estado. Para frenar el poder de la delincuencia organizada y la violencia, las autoridades deben erradicar la corrupción, investigar los vínculos con los políticos locales y nacionales y perseguir a sus lavadores de dinero y contactos en el Estado.Esto es mucho pedir para un país cuyas instituciones están cada vez más cooptadas por la delincuencia. Requerirá la cooperación permanente y el valor de la policía, los fiscales, los jueces y los políticos del país. Pero ya se ha hecho antes. Colombia podría ser un ejemplo a seguir. A partir de 2006, el gobierno de ese país empezó a tomar medidas para investigar, procesar y condenar a más de 60 miembros del Congreso que ayudaron e instigaron a los paramilitares narcotraficantes.El presidente Lasso invitó al FBI y a la policía colombiana a colaborar en la investigación del asesinato de Villavicencio. Es un buen primer paso, pero para que la iniciativa de verdad sea eficaz, la cooperación en este caso y en otros debe continuar durante el próximo gobierno y más allá, independientemente de quién gane este domingo.Los líderes ecuatorianos deben resistir la tentación de dejar la lucha contra la delincuencia solo en manos del ejército o de solo usar las armas para derrotar a los cárteles y las pandillas. Este enfoque ha demostrado ser ineficaz en países como México y muchas veces ha empeorado la violencia. En cambio, los dirigentes ecuatorianos deben apoyar a fiscales, jueces y policías independientes.Las fuerzas armadas de Ecuador, una de las instituciones de mayor confianza en el país, no están diseñadas para dirigir investigaciones penales, seguir el rastro del lavado de dinero ni denunciar a los funcionarios corruptos. Esas tareas corresponden a las instituciones civiles, como la policía y el poder judicial. Aunque estas instituciones no son inmunes a la corrupción y la politización entre sus filas, todavía pueden reencauzarse.La polarización ha abierto profundas brechas entre los partidarios de Correa y sus opositores, incluido Villavicencio. En la última semana, los políticos de ambos bandos se han culpado unos a otros del deterioro de la seguridad. Para avanzar, deben unirse en torno a un objetivo común: investigar los vínculos de los grupos criminales con los servidores públicos sin tratar de proteger a los miembros de su propio bando. Quienquiera que gane las elecciones presidenciales debe mirar más allá de las divisiones políticas y poner al país por encima del partido.El asesinato de Villavicencio marca un punto de inflexión. Pero aún hay tiempo para actuar antes de que el país siga avanzando por el camino que han recorrido Colombia y México. Es lo que Villavicencio habría querido.Freeman es investigador de Estudios Latinoamericanos en el Consejo de Relaciones Exteriores. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Ecuador’s Crime Surge Is Devastating, but There Is a Way Forward

      by

      On Aug. 14, Pedro Briones, a congressional candidate and local political leader in Ecuador, was shot down. The assassination came less than a week after Fernando Villavicencio, a presidential candidate and vocal critic of corruption, was shot dead as he left a campaign rally in the country’s capital, Quito. The killings so close to Ecuador’s general election, scheduled for Sunday, have shocked Ecuadoreans and drawn global condemnation. The slayings show that no one — not even a presidential candidate — is safe in Ecuador.Christian Zurita, an investigative journalist and a former colleague and close friend of Mr. Villavicencio, was chosen by their political party to run in his place.What will happen next is uncertain, but it is clear that the nation’s intense political polarization will not help solve its crisis of violence.The shooting of Mr. Briones is under investigation, and six Colombian nationals are being held in connection with Mr. Villavicencio’s killing. How the country’s criminal justice system handles the ongoing inquiries will be a litmus test for the nation. Ecuadorean politicians and their international partners will need to summon the political will and resources to complete an independent and thorough investigation into the killings. If the authorities prosecute just a few hit men and leave it at that, criminal groups will only grow more brazen. But if they take the longer, tougher road — rooting out and bringing to justice the masterminds behind the killings and exposing organized crime’s ties to parts of the state — the country may have a path back from the brink.As a political scientist focused on Latin America, I have lived and worked in countries like Colombia and Guatemala, where decades ago gangs and organized criminal groups began sowing chaos as they grew more powerful. Although Ecuador historically dodged the narco-trafficking-fueled violence and internal armed conflicts that bedeviled its South American neighbors during the latter half of the 20th century, it has all the trappings of a drug traffickers’ paradise. It is sandwiched between Peru and Colombia, the world’s two largest producers of coca. And Ecuador’s economy has used dollars as the legal tender since 2000, making it attractive for money launderers.The demobilization in 2017 of Colombia’s Revolutionary Armed Forces, which had long controlled Ecuadorean trafficking routes, created a vacuum that new cartels and gangs are now battling to fill. Earlier this year, I witnessed how the violence is rewriting the rules of daily life. Ecuador’s homicide rate is now the fourth highest in Latin America and extortion has risen to a startling rate. As a result, once-lively streets are now eerily empty and businesses have begun to close at nightfall. One day, I watched as a storekeeper and his patrons crowded around a smartphone to view — and applaud — clips of vigilante justice against suspected gang members. Many people I spoke to told me they planned to migrate. Since October, more than 77,000 have reached the U.S.-Mexico border: a nearly eightfold increase from 2020.Policy blunders have left Ecuador ill-equipped to face the spiral of violence. Rafael Correa, a populist who served as the country’s president from 2007 to 2017, made the first serious missteps. It’s true that some measures put in place by his administration helped cut homicides to new lows. But Mr. Correa also eliminated the police unit for special investigations, closed a U.S. military base that supplied equipment to monitor its airspace and vast territorial waters and doubled the prison population, creating a breeding ground for gangs. His successors also made blunders.President Lenín Moreno purged many of Mr. Correa’s appointees to the executive and judiciary, and won a referendum that reinstated presidential term limits scrapped by his predecessor. The judiciary opened investigations into corruption during the Correa years. Polarization flared between Mr. Correa’s supporters, who claimed they were victims of politicized justice, while critics like Mr. Moreno argued that they were rebuilding democratic checks and balances eroded under Mr. Correa. As that political melee played out, gangs turned Ecuador’s crowded prisons into their own command centers and began to infiltrate government institutions and armed forces.Guillermo Lasso, Ecuador’s current president, has been locked in battle with Mr. Correa’s followers in the National Assembly, which Mr. Lasso dissolved by decree in May. Mr. Lasso has rolled out state emergencies and even put troops on the streets to fight the gangs and cartels. But criminal groups’ hold over the country has only grown. Alarmingly, Mr. Lasso’s brother-in-law — formerly one of his closest advisers — is under investigation for alleged ties to the Albanian mafia. In March, a businessman implicated in the case was found dead.A supporter showing a flyer of Mr. Villavicencio during a protest a day after the candidate was assassinated.Carlos Noriega/Associated PressEcuador’s crime surge is transnational, with Mexican cartels, Colombian and Venezuelan groups and the Albanian mafia all vying to control the nation’s drug trade and weaken the state. While charting a path forward may seem daunting, it’s not impossible. To curb the power of organized crime and violence, the authorities need to root out corruption, investigate ties to local and national politicians and pursue their money launderers and contacts in the state.This is a tall order for a country whose institutions are increasingly co-opted by crime. It will require ongoing cooperation and courage on the part of the country’s police, prosecutors, judges and politicians. But it has been done before. Colombia could be a model. Beginning in 2006, that nation’s government began taking steps to investigate, prosecute and sentence over 60 members of Congress who aided and abetted drug-trafficking paramilitaries.President Lasso has invited the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Colombian police to assist in the investigation of Mr. Villavicencio’s killing. But for the effort to be truly effective, the cooperation on this case and others must continue into the next administration and beyond, regardless of who wins this Sunday.Ecuador’s leaders must resist the temptation to delegate the anti-crime fight entirely to the military, or to use firepower alone to beat back the cartels and gangs. That approach has proved ineffective in countries like Mexico, and has often made the violence worse. Instead, Ecuador’s leaders must support independent prosecutors, judges and the police.Ecuador’s armed forces, one of the nation’s most trusted institutions, is not designed to lead criminal investigations, track down money launderers or expose corrupt public servants. Those are jobs for civil institutions, like the police and judiciary. While these institutions are not immune to corruption and politicization among its ranks, they are not beyond saving.Polarization has carved deep rifts between Mr. Correa’s supporters and his opponents, including Mr. Villavicencio. In the last week, politicians on both sides have resorted to blaming one another for the deteriorating security situation. To move forward, they must unite behind a shared purpose — to investigate criminal groups’ ties to public officeholders without seeking to shield members of their own camp. Whoever wins the upcoming presidential election must look beyond political divisions and put country over party.Mr. Villavicencio’s killing marks an inflection point. But there is still time to act before the country progresses farther down the path Colombia and Mexico have traveled. It is what Mr. Villavicencio would have wanted.Will Freeman is a fellow for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. He focuses on understanding why developing democracies succeed or fail to end impunity for grand corruption.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 150 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      In Bronx DA Race, Darcel Clark Faces a Challenge From Tess Cohen

      by

      Darcel Clark is running for a third term, emphasizing a balance between public safety and justice. Her opponent, Tess Cohen, is focused on alternatives to incarceration.As Darcel Clark, the Bronx district attorney, made her way through the crowd at a Juneteenth celebration on Monday afternoon, it was clear she was in friendly territory. “Hi, D.A.,” a group of women called out. Ms. Clark smiled, hugged the women and asked how they were.A couple of miles away, Tess Cohen, the criminal defense and civil rights lawyer who is challenging Ms. Clark in next week’s Democratic primary, was knocking on doors at the Pelham Parkway public housing complex, trying to get the word out about her campaign, one apartment at a time.The June 27 primary offers Democratic voters in the Bronx something they have not had in recent years: a choice in the race for district attorney. But Ms. Cohen, who is challenging Ms. Clark from the left, faces a difficult fight against a well-known incumbent with more money, the support of the political establishment and name recognition across the borough.Ms. Clark, 61, a former state appellate court judge, was the first Black woman to be elected district attorney in New York. She grew up in the Bronx and was raised in public housing and went to public schools. She was nominated by Bronx Democratic leaders in 2015 and faced no primary opponent that year or in her re-election bid in 2019.Ms. Cohen, 36, is a criminal defense lawyer at ZMO Law. She spent more than eight years as a prosecutor in New York City’s Office of the Special Narcotics Prosecutor. She is originally from Riverside, Calif., and has lived in the Bronx for 11 years.Ms. Cohen said in an interview that she decided to run because she was “really frustrated with how the Bronx is consistently left behind” when it comes to receiving services and “things that create true public safety.” Specifically, she suggested that more people could benefit from mental health and gun court programs in the Bronx, which can provide an alternative to incarceration.Ms. Clark said that her biggest accomplishment has been “putting humanity into the criminal justice system,” a mission she said she wanted to continue, and noted that she was focused on balancing both public safety and justice. “You cannot do this work if you don’t know the people that you serve,” she added.Ms. Clark is leading the race by some traditional campaign markers: She has more money on hand, and the backing of numerous unions and Democratic elected officials.Kholood Eid for The New York TimesIn a recent debate hosted by BronxNet, a local TV station, the candidates staked out different positions on crime, on a 2019 legal reform law, and on the troubled Rikers Island jail complex.Ms. Clark said that her office had done “everything that we can to combat crime, whether it’s creating new bureaus in my office to deal with crime strategies, to deal with violent criminal enterprise — anything that will help victims of crimes.” She pointed to her Community Justice Bureau, formerly called the Alternatives to Incarceration Unit, which helps prosecutors connect people with community resources.Ms. Cohen argued that more could be done, and said the district attorney’s focus on incarceration has been detrimental. “The Bronx continues to be left behind,” she said, adding that the borough created a gun court program, which gives a second chance to young people who face gun possession charges and have no prior violent felony convictions, years after Brooklyn had such a program.The candidates also differed on a 2019 law, backed by progressives, that favors criminal defendants.In April, Ms. Clark and two other district attorneys sought to reverse some of the changes progressives had won. One revision would have allowed judges more freedom in detaining certain defendants on bail. Another would have placed a timeline on defense lawyers to flag and request outstanding case material, or “discovery,” from prosecutors. The prosecutors ultimately abandoned the changes.Ms. Clark said that she was in favor of the 2019 discovery reform, especially after spending 16 years on the bench. “I would never want to go back to the way it was,” Ms. Clark said, but she said that she supported “reasonable revisions.”Ms. Cohen said the proposed changes represented a “gutting of the reform” and said that “we cannot go back to a system where we have Kalief Browders.”Mr. Browder was sent to Rikers Island when he was 16, accused of stealing a backpack. He never stood trial and was never found guilty of any crime, but he was held at Rikers for three years. He killed himself in 2015. Prosecutors in his case had received a number of adjournments that prolonged his detention. State legislators invoked his name when they passed the 2019 reform, which aimed to curb such delays.Ms. Clark said during the debate that the Browder incident saddens her to this day. She called the handling of his case a “colossal failure” of the district attorney’s office, his defense attorney, the Department of Correction and nine judges, of which she was one.“I accept that I was part of that,” Ms. Clark said. “But also part of that means that you do something about it, so that doesn’t happen again.”The candidates agreed that Rikers should be closed, but they differed on how it should be managed in the meantime.A federal monitor overseeing the Rikers Island jails complex recently said that officials, including Louis A. Molina, the New York City correction commissioner, were hiding information about violence. And a federal judge signaled that she might be willing to consider a federal takeover.Ms. Cohen argued in favor of a federal takeover of Rikers. She said in an interview that the district attorney’s office should open an independent investigation into the jail. She said that Mayor Eric Adams and Mr. Molina were “really actively hiding how terrible things are at Rikers,” noting a new policy where jails would no longer announce inmate deaths.“The D.A.’s office isn’t proactively going out to look into instances, it’s waiting to see if other agencies refer instances to them,” Ms. Cohen said. “Even when they do bring charges, often they are late or unsuccessful.”On Juneteenth, Ms. Cohen was handing out campaign fliers and introducing herself to residents in a public housing complex.Kholood Eid for The New York TimesMs. Clark said during the debate that she had opened an office on Rikers and opened a public integrity bureau that handles corruption. She said she had won indictments against inmates and corrections officers. “The indictments are happening,” Ms. Clark said. “It takes time to happen.”Asked about a federal takeover of Rikers, Ms. Clark said that she was “in favor of anything that is going to bring justice, that’s going to make Rikers Island more humane and more safe, but it’s not my decision.”Ms. Clark is leading the race by some traditional campaign markers. She has more money on hand — $281,000 according to a report filed on June 16, compared with just under $16,000 for Ms. Cohen — and the backing of numerous unions and Democratic Party heavyweights, including Senator Chuck Schumer, Attorney General Letitia James, Bronx Borough President Vanessa Gibson, and Assembly Speaker Carl E. Heastie.“Darcel is a strong candidate, she’s been a lifelong Bronxite, she knows intimately what the issues of the Bronx are, and I just don’t see the challenger bringing that to the table,” said Virginia Krompinger, president of the Benjamin Franklin Reform Democratic Club, which endorsed the incumbent.Ms. Cohen has won the support of voters and organizations explicitly looking for a change — including a number of formerly incarcerated people who were exonerated. Amanda Litman, the co-executive director of Run for Something, a progressive group that recruits political candidates, said her group had endorsed Ms. Cohen because “she knows the system in and out, she has a really strong progressive vision for what the office can be and what the office can do.”Turnout in New York City’s primary elections is not expected to be high — and it remains to be seen how focused voters are on the district attorney contest in the Bronx.Ayisha Khalid, a college student studying politics and criminal justice, answered the door when Ms. Cohen knocked, listened to her pitch and appeared to appreciate the candidate’s ideas about providing second chances for people who commit crimes. Still, she said, “I have to read more about it, because I had no clue.” More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      DeSantis Steps Up Attacks on Trump, Hitting Him on Crime and Covid

      by

      Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida vowed to repeal the First Step Act, a Trump-era criminal justice law, if elected president. He called it “basically a jailbreak bill.”Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida escalated his hostilities with former President Donald J. Trump on Friday, arguing that his Republican presidential rival was weak on crime and immigration, and accusing him of ceding critical decision-making during the coronavirus pandemic to Dr. Anthony S. Fauci.In an appearance with the conservative commentator Ben Shapiro, Mr. DeSantis accused Mr. Trump, the G.O.P. front-runner, of “moving left” on criminal justice and immigration issues after winning over the party’s base in 2015 and 2016.He pledged that he would repeal what is known as the First Step Act, a bipartisan criminal justice measure signed into law by Mr. Trump in 2018 that expanded early-release programs and modified sentencing laws, including mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders.“He enacted a bill, basically a jailbreak bill,” Mr. DeSantis said. “It has allowed dangerous people out of prison who have now reoffended and really, really hurt a number of people.”This year, The New York Times reported that Mr. DeSantis and his allies saw the criminal justice bill, which Mr. Trump signed at the urging of his son-in-law Jared Kushner — and instantly regretted — as an area of political weakness, and that Mr. DeSantis had signaled he would use it in the nomination fight. The bill is unpopular with parts of Mr. Trump’s hard-core base.But for Mr. DeSantis, assailing Mr. Trump over the First Step Act is potentially complicated. Mr. DeSantis himself voted for the first version of the bill when he was in Congress, and Trump allies have sought to highlight that fact.“So now Swampy Politician Ron DeSanctimonious is claiming he voted for it before he voted against it,” Steven Cheung, a spokesman for Mr. Trump, said in a statement. “He sounds just like John Kerry. What a phony! He can’t run away from his disastrous, embarrassing, and low-energy campaign announcement. Rookie mistakes and unforced errors — that’s who he is.”(Mr. DeSantis’s allies note that the version of the bill he voted for looked significantly different, and that the final version passed when he was no longer in the House.)When Mr. Shapiro asked Mr. DeSantis about Mr. Trump’s recent criticism that crime had risen on his watch in Florida, the former president’s adopted state, Mr. DeSantis bristled and said Mr. Trump’s policies had undermined law and order.Mr. DeSantis stepped up his attacks on his onetime ally, whom he had avoided criticizing directly for months, less than 48 hours after he entered the race in a bumpy Twitter event.And as Mr. DeSantis seems to veer to the right on issues like crime, some of his campaign’s internal strategy is coming to light.At a fund-raising meeting in Miami on Thursday, donors peppered Mr. DeSantis’s top campaign staff members with questions about his policy positions and how they should be presented to other Republicans, according to a leaked audio recording posted online by the website Florida Politics.One donor raised a question about the rightward shift, to which a campaign official eventually responded, “We just got to win a primary in order to be in a general.”The donors and officials also discussed how to talk to Republicans who support abortion rights. (Mr. DeSantis last month signed a six-week abortion ban in Florida, which contains limited exceptions, while Mr. Trump has been hesitant to support a federal ban.)A staff member offered one possible answer.“Abortion is safe, legal and rare in Florida,” he said, parroting a phrase coined by former President Bill Clinton, a Democrat. “It has not been banned,” he added. “It is limited.”In his interview with Mr. Shapiro on Friday, Mr. DeSantis sought to cast himself as unwavering on illegal immigration, saying that Mr. Trump had attacked him for opposing amnesty legislation while in Congress.He also faulted Mr. Trump for his administration’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak in 2020, especially the level of influence exerted by Dr. Fauci, the longtime top infectious disease expert and face of the federal government’s pandemic response.Dr. Fauci, who retired in January, has been a frequent target of Republican attacks over issues like remote learning, stay-at-home orders and vaccine mandates.“He responded by elevating Anthony Fauci and really turning the reins over to Dr. Fauci, and I think to terrible consequences for the United States,” Mr. DeSantis said. “I was the leader in this country in fighting back against Fauci. We bucked him every step of the way.”He said that Dr. Fauci should have been fired, but Mr. Trump had honored him.“I think the fact that Donald Trump gave Anthony Fauci a presidential commendation on Trump’s last day in office, that was a gut punch to millions of people around this country who were harmed by Fauci’s lockdowns,” Mr. DeSantis said.A day earlier, in a post by Mr. Trump on his Truth Social platform, the former president slammed Mr. DeSantis over Florida’s response to the pandemic. He said that even former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York had done a better job limiting the loss of lives to the virus than Mr. DeSantis had.Mr. DeSantis described Mr. Trump’s claim as “very bizarre,” and said that it suggested he would double down on his actions if there were another pandemic. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Donald Trump también debe responder ante la justicia

      by

      Por primera vez en la historia de Estados Unidos, un gran jurado ha acusado formalmente a un expresidente del país. Donald Trump estuvo durante años, como candidato, en la presidencia y tras su salida de ella, ignorando las normas y los precedentes democráticos y legales, intentando plegar al Departamento de Justicia y al poder judicial a sus caprichos y comportándose como si él no estuviese sujeto a las reglas.Como demuestra su acusación, sí lo está.El reiterado desprecio por la ley suele conducir a una acusación penal, y esa es la consecuencia a la que se enfrenta hoy Trump. Los fiscales federales y estatales hicieron bien en dejar de lado las preocupaciones por las consecuencias políticas, o la reverencia por la presidencia, e iniciar exhaustivas investigaciones penales sobre la conducta de Trump en al menos cuatro casos. La investigación del fiscal de distrito de Manhattan es la primera que conduce a una acusación formal.Trump transformó por completo la relación entre la presidencia y el Estado de derecho, y a menudo afirmaba que el presidente está por encima de la ley. De modo que es adecuado que sus actos como presidente y como candidato sean ahora ponderados oficialmente por jueces y jurados, con la posibilidad de que se enfrente a sanciones penales. Trump dañó gravemente las instituciones políticas y legales de Estados Unidos, y volvió a amenazarlas con llamados a protestas generales cuando fuera acusado. Sin embargo, esas instituciones han demostrado ser lo bastante fuertes para exigirle responsabilidades por ese daño.Un sano respeto por el sistema legal también requiere que los estadounidenses dejen de lado sus opiniones políticas a la hora de formarse un juicio sobre estos casos. Aunque Trump pidió habitualmente que el FBI investigara a sus enemigos, que fueran imputados o enfrentaran la pena de muerte, su indiferencia hacia las garantías procesales para los demás no debería negarle los beneficios del sistema, incluidos un juicio imparcial y la presunción de inocencia. Al mismo tiempo, ningún jurado debería extenderle ningún privilegio como expresidente. Debería seguir los mismos procedimientos que cualquier otro ciudadano.La acusación es aún confidencial, y es posible que no se conozcan los cargos contra Trump hasta dentro de unos días. Pero Alvin Bragg, el fiscal de distrito, ha estado investigando un caso de posible fraude e infracciones por parte de Trump en la financiación de su campaña, al ocultar los pagos que le hizo a la estrella del cine porno Stormy Daniels antes de las elecciones de 2016. Sus actos —utilizar dinero para silenciar a los críticos y ocultar información políticamente perjudicial— estuvieron mal. La pregunta que se le planteará al jurado es si esa conducta alcanza el umbral suficiente para ser susceptible de una condena por delito grave.Si son esas las acusaciones, la condena dependerá de demostrar que Trump participó en la falsificación de registros mercantiles mientras se infringía la ley sobre financiación de campañas, una estrategia jurídica un tanto novedosa. La falsificación de registros puede ser imputable como delito menor en Nueva York; para que sea un delito más grave, se debe probar que lo hizo junto con un segundo delito, en este caso, una posible vulneración de la ley en la financiación de la campaña. El expresidente, que aspira a un segundo mandato en 2024, ha negado las acusaciones y ha dicho que la causa presentada contra él por Bragg, demócrata, obedece a motivaciones políticas.Si bien algunos expertos jurídicos han cuestionado la teoría en que se apoya el caso de Bragg, no hay ninguna base para acusarlo de motivaciones políticas, una afirmación que Trump ha hecho durante muchos años, cada vez que se investigaba su conducta. Del mismo modo que a los miembros del jurado se les instruye para que ignoren las pruebas indebidamente introducidas en un juicio, también deberán ignorar todas las insinuaciones sin fundamento de los partidarios y los defensores de Trump en estos casos, y juzgarlas estrictamente por sus méritos.Tres de las otras investigaciones que podrían dar lugar a acusaciones son más graves, porque conllevan acusar a Trump, no solo de haber vulnerado la ley, sino también de haber abusado de su cargo presidencial.Las imputaciones contra él en Georgia están entre las más vergonzosas. Fani Willis, fiscal de distrito del condado de Fulton, está considerando presentar cargos penales contra varias personas, incluido Trump, por intentar anular los resultados de las elecciones presidenciales de 2020 en ese estado, que ganó el presidente Biden por 11.779 votos. Trump presionó repetidas veces al secretario de Estado de Georgia, Brad Raffensperger, para que “buscara” votos adicionales que pudieran cambiar el resultado de las elecciones en el estado, parte de un plan para socavar la voluntad de los votantes.Un gran jurado especial formado por Willis recomendó en febrero que se presentaran cargos en el caso; todavía se desconoce qué personas o acusaciones se incluirán en las recomendaciones del gran jurado o a quién podría intentar acusar Willis, si es que procede.Una investigación del Departamento de Justicia federal dirigida por un fiscal especial, Jack Smith, también podría dar lugar a acusaciones formales contra Trump. Smith está investigando los intentos del expresidente de impedir el traspaso pacífico del poder el 6 de enero de 2021, cuando Trump incitó a una turba armada que atacó el Capitolio de Estados Unidos, amenazando a los legisladores allí reunidos para certificar los resultados de las elecciones presidenciales. Un informe del Senado realizado por los dos partidos concluyó que siete muertes estaban relacionadas con el ataque.El equipo de Smith también está investigando al expresidente por su indebido manejo de los documentos clasificados que fueron retirados de la Casa Blanca y llevados a Mar-a-Lago, su residencia privada en Florida. En el caso se han recuperado unos 300 documentos clasificados. Los fiscales también están estudiando si Trump, sus abogados o miembros de su personal trataron de confundir a los funcionarios del Estado que pidieron la devolución de los documentos.Además de los cargos penales, Trump se enfrenta a varias demandas civiles. La fiscal general de Nueva York, Letitia James, ha demandado al expresidente por inflar de forma “flagrante” y fraudulenta el valor de sus activos inmobiliarios. Tres de los hijos adultos de Trump también figuran en la demanda. Un grupo de policías del Capitolio y legisladores demócratas han demandado al presidente, aduciendo que sus actos del 6 de enero incitaron a la turba que les provocó daños físicos y emocionales. E. Jean Carroll, una escritora que acusó a Trump de haberla violado, ha demandado al expresidente por difamación. Trump niega las acusaciones.Sin duda, procesar al expresidente ahondará las divisiones políticas existentes que tanto daño han hecho al país en los últimos años. Trump ya ha avivado esa división, al tachar a los fiscales que están detrás de las investigaciones —varios de ellos personas negras— de “racistas”. Afirmó en un mensaje publicado en las redes sociales que sería detenido, y se dirigió así a sus simpatizantes: “¡PROTESTEMOS, RECUPEREMOS NUESTRA NACIÓN!”. Con ese lenguaje, estaba repitiendo el grito de guerra que precedió a los disturbios en el Capitolio. Las autoridades de la ciudad de Nueva York, que no se arriesgan a que se repitan los actos de los partidarios de Trump, se han estado preparando para la posible agitación.Esas acusaciones del expresidente están claramente dirigidas a socavar las denuncias contra él, protegerse de las consecuencias de su mala conducta y utilizar los casos para su beneficio político. Los dos fiscales de distrito en estas causas son demócratas electos, pero su raza y sus afinidades políticas no tienen ninguna relevancia para los procesos judiciales. (Smith no está afiliado a ninguno de los dos partidos). No obstante, el presidente de la Cámara de Representantes, Kevin McCarthy, demostró de inmediato la intención de su partido de politizar la imputación al calificar a Bragg de “fiscal radical” que persigue “la venganza política” contra Trump. McCarthy no tiene la jurisdicción sobre el fiscal de distrito de Manhattan ni le corresponde interferir en un proceso penal y, sin embargo, se ha comprometido a que la Cámara de Representantes determine si la fiscalía de Bragg está recibiendo fondos federales.La decisión de procesar a un expresidente es una tarea solemne, sobre todo teniendo en cuenta las profundas fisuras nacionales que Trump exacerbará, inevitablemente, a medida que se acerque la campaña de 2024. Pero el costo de no buscar la justicia contra un dirigente que puede haber cometido esos delitos sería aún más alto.El Comité Editorial es un grupo de periodistas de opinión cuyas perspectivas están sustentadas en experiencia, investigación, debate y ciertos valores arraigados por mucho tiempo. Es una entidad independiente de la sala de redacción. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Ron DeSantis Burnishes Tough-on-Crime Image to Run in ’24 and Take On Trump

      by

      The Florida governor, preparing for an all-but-declared campaign, is said to see an opening to take on the former president from the right.Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida has spent months shoring up a tough-on-crime image as he weighs a run for the White House, calling for stronger penalties against drug traffickers and using $5,000 bonuses to bolster law-enforcement recruitment to his state.Now, Mr. DeSantis and his allies plan to use that image to draw a contrast with the Republican front-runner in the 2024 race, former President Donald J. Trump.Mr. DeSantis and his backers see the signature criminal-justice law enacted by Mr. Trump in 2018 as an area of weakness with his base, and Mr. DeSantis has indicated that he would highlight it when the two men tussle for the Republican nomination, according to three people with knowledge of Mr. DeSantis’s thinking. That law, known as the First Step Act, reduced the sentences for thousands of prisoners.Mr. DeSantis has yet to officially announce his candidacy, but he has been quietly staffing a presidential campaign, and his allies have been building up a super PAC. Since at least his re-election in November, Mr. DeSantis has privately suggested that Mr. Trump’s record on crime is one of several policy issues on which Mr. Trump is vulnerable to attacks from the right.One potentially complicating factor for Mr. DeSantis: He voted for the initial House version of the First Step Act in May 2018, while still a congressman. He resigned his seat in September 2018 after winning the Republican primary for governor, and was not in the House to vote for the more expansive version of the sentencing reform bill that ultimately passed into law in December 2018.Other Trump vulnerabilities, in the view of Mr. DeSantis and some of his allies, include Mr. Trump’s deference to Dr. Anthony S. Fauci as the nation’s top infectious disease expert during his initial response to the coronavirus pandemic.In July 2020, President Donald J. Trump met with Mr. DeSantis to discuss storm preparedness in Florida and the pandemic.Al Drago for The New York TimesMr. DeSantis has already pushed that point publicly, contrasting his record on the pandemic with that of Mr. Trump. He recently told the interviewer Piers Morgan that he would have fired Dr. Fauci. In the early days of the pandemic, however, Mr. DeSantis did not call for Mr. Trump to fire Dr. Fauci.Mr. DeSantis has said nothing publicly to telegraph that he intends to directly hit Mr. Trump as soft on crime. Yet for months, he has been privately gearing up for such a contrast, whether it comes from him or his allies.Public safety was an issue in Mr. DeSantis’s 2022 campaign, as it was for a number of Republicans. A person familiar with Mr. DeSantis’s thinking, who was granted anonymity because the person was not allowed to discuss private deliberations, said the governor viewed public safety as encompassing other policy matters, such as immigration.In January, Mr. DeSantis announced a series of legislative measures for the coming session in Florida, which, among other actions, would toughen penalties against drug traffickers.“Other states endanger their citizens by making it easier to put criminals back on the street. Here, in Florida, we will continue to support and enact policies to protect our communities and keep Floridians safe,” Mr. DeSantis said in a statement at the time. “Florida will remain the law-and-order state.”He has also instituted a program to pay $5,000 bonuses to recruit new Florida law enforcement officers and has played up his success in inducing hundreds to relocate to Florida from other states, such as New York and California. And he made a mini-tour last month visiting law enforcement offices in major cities in Democratic-leaning states.Mr. Trump is aware of his vulnerability on the crime issue because of his record as president, according to people close to him. Shortly after leaving office he began trying to inoculate himself against attacks by promising an uncompromising law-and-order agenda, with especially harsh treatment of drug dealers.In a speech last year at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, Senator Tom Cotton, an Arkansas Republican who was a staunch supporter of most of Mr. Trump’s agenda but a critic of the First Step Act, called Mr. Trump’s moves on criminal justice reform the “worst mistake” of his term..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.Since becoming a candidate for the third time in November, Mr. Trump has released a handful of direct-to-camera videos discussing policy. In one, he proposed strengthening police departments with additional hiring and criticized what he called “radical Marxist prosecutors who are abolishing cash bail, refusing to charge crimes and surrendering our cities to violent criminals.” He also called for deploying the National Guard into areas with high crime rates.But he did not address sentencing, the core of his surprisingly lenient approach in office — and one that was at odds with his law-and-order campaign talk.Asked to comment, Steven Cheung, a spokesman for Mr. Trump’s campaign, described Mr. Trump as “the law-and-order president that cracked down on crime and put away violent offenders, resulting in the lowest crime rate in decades.” Mr. Cheung accused Mr. DeSantis of giving “a safe haven for violent felons” that has resulted “in rampant crime in Florida” and said that Mr. Trump had received support from law enforcement officials around the country. And Mr. Cheung pointed to an array of crime statistics in Florida that the Trump campaign planned to highlight as unfavorable for Mr. DeSantis.Lindsey Curnutte, a spokeswoman for Mr. DeSantis, declined to comment.As president, following the advice of his son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, in December 2018, Mr. Trump signed the First Step Act, which resulted in more than 3,000 inmates being released early from federal prison.Mr. Trump promoting the First Step Act in November 2018. The law led to the early release of thousands of prisoners.Al Drago for The New York TimesA Republican official who is not affiliated with Mr. DeSantis and who has closely tracked criminal recidivism among people released from prison because of the First Step Act, said that the volume of those releases would provide fodder for attack ads against Mr. Trump.On Wednesday, Pedro L. Gonzalez, a conservative with a large online following who often attacks Mr. Trump from the right and defends Mr. DeSantis, tweeted that the man charged with assaulting a U.S. Senate staff member over the weekend was “released from prison thanks to Trump’s First Step Act” and linked to a Fox News story about the case.Many of those released under the First Step Act had been imprisoned for selling drugs — a crime that Mr. Trump now says publicly that he wants to punish with the death penalty because of the destruction wrought by illegal drugs.Mr. Trump, early on as president, mused admiringly in private about how dictators like Xi Jinping of China and former President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines executed drug dealers. At other times, he asked top officials whether it was feasible to shoot in the legs migrants who were illegally crossing the border.But for most of his term, Mr. Trump suppressed this instinct publicly. He came to believe that a more compassionate criminal justice policy would help him with African American voters, according to people familiar with his thinking.Because of this — and a competition in 2020 over spending with the billionaire candidate Michael R. Bloomberg — the Trump campaign paid millions of dollars to run a Super Bowl commercial highlighting his commutation of the life sentence of Alice Marie Johnson, a Black woman convicted of leading a multimillion-dollar drug trafficking ring. Mr. Trump and his team hailed the First Step Act as a historic bipartisan achievement.“Did it for African Americans. Nobody else could have gotten it done,” Mr. Trump wrote in response to a reporter’s question in 2022, adding, “Got zero credit.” The word “zero” was underlined for emphasis.But in June 2020, as Americans massed on the streets to protest the police killing of George Floyd, Mr. Trump told his aides privately, according to Axios, that it was a mistake to have listened to Mr. Kushner.Mr. Trump had been paying close attention to the influential Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who flayed the president as abandoning his tough-on-crime platform.“In 2016, Donald Trump ran as a law-and-order candidate because he meant it,” Mr. Carlson said in a June 2020 monologue that was anxiously shared around Mr. Trump’s orbit. “But the president’s famously sharp instincts, the ones that won him the presidency almost four years ago, have been since subverted at every level by Jared Kushner.”Mr. Trump made a sharp turn away from Mr. Kushner’s criminal justice policies during that summer of Black Lives Matter protests, and he never looked back. He urged his military leaders to send troops into cities like Seattle to take out anybody involved in riots. Mark T. Esper, who served at the time as defense secretary and resisted those requests, wrote in his memoir that Mr. Trump asked, “Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?”In his final six months in office, Mr. Trump was erratic in his criminal justice policies. He went on a historic federal execution spree. But he also went on a pardon spree — handing out many dubious pardons, including one to a drug smuggler with a history of violence, through a process heavily influenced by Mr. Kushner.And by the time Mr. Trump was plainly looking for a future in politics again in 2021, he began talking publicly about executing drug dealers. More