Nailing Down “Top Cop” Kamala Harris on Criminal Justice Reform
After becoming the surprise new Democratic nominee for the presidency in July 2024, U.S. Vice-Pres. Kamala Harris has leaned into her credentials as a former California prosecutor. But her record has enough to alienate both progressives and law-and-order voters.
Before becoming one of California’s U.S. Senators in 2016, Harris won elected office four times: twice as San Francisco District Attorney, beginning in 2002, and twice more as the state’s Attorney General in 2010 and 2014. In those roles she earned a reputation as a tough-on-crime prosecutor, even calling herself California’s “top cop.” Her tenure was marked by decisions that alienated criminal justice activists; she opposed the initiative to legalize marijuana in 2010 and the following year pushed for a truancy program that allowed district attorneys to charge parents with a misdemeanor if their children missed 10% of a school year without a valid reason. She also did not back a 2015 proposal for independent investigations of police killings, and she resisted requiring body-worn cameras for police. Nor did she support easing mandatory minimum sentencing laws.
In a controversial 2014 move while she was Attorney General, her office argued against early parole for non-violent offenders, citing concerns over the loss of cheap prison labor—including prisoners fighting wildfires for $2 a day. This was actually part of the state’s defense against accusations of easing overcrowding in state prisons, as mandated by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2011 ruling in Brown v. Plata. After backlash, the state agreed to extend 2-for-1 credits to eligible minimum-security prisoners, and Harris later claimed she was “shocked” by the labor-related argument made on her behalf.
Progressives said her tough-on-crime tactics contributed to the mass incarceration, which Brown v. Plata ordered the state to mitigate. But her legacy also included reformist initiatives, like diversion programs for young offenders, as well as controversial actions, such as defending California’s death penalty. Yet when she was San Francisco D.A., Harris refused to seek the death penalty for an accused “cop killer,” despite intense pressure from politicians and police unions.
After moving to the U.S. Senate, Harris shifted away from her prosecutorial mindset and emerged as a vocal advocate for criminal justice reform. Her efforts were particularly focused on addressing police brutality in the wake of George Floyd’s 2020 death. She shifted her stance on body-worn cameras, supporting legislation for a pilot program in federal Customs and Border Patrol. Sen. Harris also co-sponsored legislation to federally legalize marijuana, citing its disproportionate impact on people of color.
Despite this evolution, Harris’ past positions and inconsistent stance on the death penalty have caused her Presidential candidacy to meet with pushback. Black and Latino communities have some skepticism about her commitment to criminal justice reform and view Harris as someone who checks public sentiment before taking a stand, rather than leading on critical issues from the outset. That her career in law enforcement is seen as both an asset and a liability reflects the broader debates within the nation over the direction of criminal justice reform.
Sources: Sacramento Bee, Vox
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login