SCOTUS Justices Blasted Cops For Chokehold Killings Over 30 Years Ago

Early on the morning of October 6, 1976, police officers of the City of Los Angeles stopped Adolph Lyons for a traffic code violation. Although Lyons offered no resistance, the officers, without provocation, seized Lyons and applied a chokehold. The hold rendered Lyons unconscious and damaged his larynx. Along with damages against the officers, Lyons sought an injunction against the City barring the use of such control holds.[1][2]

Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall recounted the events surrounding Lyon’s arrest, writing:

As Lyons struggled for air, the officer handcuffed him, but continued to apply the chokehold until he blacked out.

Adolph Lyons is a 24-year-old Negro male who resides in Los Angeles. According to the uncontradicted evidence in the record, at about 2 a. m. on October 6, 1976, Lyons was pulled over to the curb by two officers of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) for a traffic infraction because one of his taillights was burned out. The officers greeted him with drawn revolvers as he exited from his car. Lyons was told to face his car and spread his legs. He did so. He was then ordered to clasp his hands and put them on top of his head. He again complied. After one of the officers completed a patdown search, Lyons dropped his hands, but was ordered to place them back above his head, and one of the officers grabbed Lyons’ hands and slammed them onto his head. Lyons complained about the pain caused by the ring of keys he was holding in his hand. Within 5 to 10 seconds, the officer began to choke Lyons by applying a forearm against his throat. When Lyons regained consciousness, he was lying face down on the ground, choking, gasping for air, and spitting up blood and dirt. He had urinated and defecated. He was issued a traffic citation and released. [case citations deleted]

In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that federal courts were without jurisdiction to entertain Lyons’ claim for injunctive relief. The fact that Lyons had been choked once did nothing to establish “a real and immediate threat that he would again be stopped. . .by an officer who would illegally choke him into unconsciousness.” The Court held that in order to establish an actual controversy, Lyons would have to show either 1) that all Los Angeles police officers always choked citizens with whom they had encounters, or 2) that the City ordered or authorized officers to act in such a manner. Lyons was thus limited to suing the police and the city for individual damages.[1][2]

Justice Marshall wrote a dissenting opinion that was joined by Justices Brennan, Blackmun and Stevens.[2][3] In that opinion, Marshall blasted the majority’s decision as absurd, writing:

Since no one can show that he will be choked in the future, no one—not even a person who, like Lyons, has almost been choked to death—has standing to challenge the continuation of the policy.

As Mother Jones pointed out in an article last week, “Marshall presented a clear-eyed appraisal of the reckless use of chokeholds,” noting that “three-quarters of the 16 people killed by LAPD chokeholds in less than a decade were black men,” a “pattern of abuse most recently illustrated by the choking death of Eric Garner at the hands of a New York City cop.” [2]

Marshall also noted that LAPD cops applied chokeholds with indifference to their inherent dangers, not recognizing that a chokehold “induces a flight response that may be perceived as willful resistance, and that police trainers failed to tell officers that a chokehold takes less than a minute to kill a person.[2][3]

Below are some excerpts from Marshall’s opinion:[3]

Although the city instructs its officers that use of a chokehold does not constitute deadly force, since 1975 no less than 16 persons have died following the use of a chokehold by an LAPD police officer. Twelve have been Negro males. The evidence submitted to the District Court established that for many years it has been the official policy of the city to permit police officers to employ chokeholds in a variety of situations where they face no threat of violence. […]

Depending on the position of the officer’s arm and the force applied, the victim’s voluntary or involuntary reaction, and his state of health, an officer may inadvertently crush the victim’s larynx, trachea, or hyoid.

It is undisputed that chokeholds pose a high and unpredictable risk of serious injury or death. Chokeholds are intended to bring a subject under control by causing pain and rendering him unconscious. Depending on the position of the officer’s arm and the force applied, the victim’s voluntary or involuntary reaction, and his state of health, an officer may inadvertently crush the victim’s larynx, trachea, or hyoid. The result may be death caused by either cardiac arrest or asphyxiation. An LAPD officer described the reaction of a person to being choked as “do[ing] the chicken,” in reference apparently to the reactions of a chicken when its neck is wrung. The victim experiences extreme pain. His face turns blue as he is deprived of oxygen, he goes into spasmodic convulsions, his eyes roll back, his body wriggles, his feet kick up and down, and his arms move about wildly. […]

Although there has been no occasion to determine the precise contours of the city’s chokehold policy, the evidence submitted to the District Court provides some indications. LAPD Training Officer Terry Speer testified […] that in instructing officers concerning the use of force, the LAPD does not distinguish between felony and misdemeanor suspects. Moreover, the officers are taught to maintain the chokehold until the suspect goes limp despite substantial evidence that the application of a chokehold invariably induces a “flight or flee” syndrome, producing an involuntary struggle by the victim which can easily be misinterpreted by the officer as willful resistance that must be overcome by prolonging the chokehold and increasing the force applied. In addition, officers are instructed that the chokeholds can be safely deployed for up to three or four minutes. Robert Jarvis, the city’s expert who has taught at the Los Angeles Police Academy for the past 12 years, admitted that officers are never told that the bar-arm control can cause death if applied for just two seconds. Of the nine deaths for which evidence was submitted to the District Court, the average duration of the choke where specified was approximately 40 seconds. [case citations deleted][3]

Law enforcement officials, such as LAPD Chief Daryl Gates hailed the court’s ruling in Lyons as vindication that “this hold is not cruel and inhuman.”[2]

SCOTUS has yet to reconsider whether the use of chokeholds is constitutional.

Footnotes:

1. Los Angeles v. Lyons | The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent .., http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1982/1982_81_1064 (accessed December 8, 2014).

2. Thurgood Marshall Blasted Police for Killing Black Men With .., http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/12/supreme-court-police-chokehold-garner (accessed December 8, 2014).

3. LOS ANGELES v. LYONS, 461 U.S. 95 (1983).., http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=461&invol=95 (accessed December 8, 2014)

You must be logged in to post a comment Login