A federal judge has barred Los Angeles Police Department officers from using so-called non-lethal launchers at protests, after finding that the department violated previous court orders by using such weapons to disperse crowds during last summer’s anti-immigration protests.
In her ruling Wednesday, US District Judge Consuelo B. Marshall sided with the contempt petition filed by Black Lives Matter-Los Angeles attorneys.
That same day LAPD officials sent a department-wide memo announcing the immediate suspension of the use of 40-millimeter weapons as a result of Marshall’s decision. The memo advised those seeking further clarification to contact the department’s disaster management and legal affairs division.
“Therefore, 40mm IS ABSOLUTELY NOT TO BE USED FOR ANY CROWD CONTROL SITUATION,” said the memo, a copy of which was reviewed by the Times.
The first order issued by Marshall in 2021 placed certain restrictions on the use of the weapon, including requiring special training for commanders; issuing a warning before firing such weapons; and limiting their use only to cases where “the officer reasonably believes that the suspect is resisting violence or poses an immediate threat of violence or physical harm.”
The latest order bans the use of the weapon, identified by its neon green handle, which has been used by police in recent protests to clear crowds after the demonstrations were declared illegal. The weapon fires projectiles the size of a mini soda can at speeds in excess of 200 mph.
But attorneys for Black Lives Matters-LA argued that the LAPD was ignoring the law — citing multiple violations of its contempt act. Officers were already prohibited from firing weapons at or near the feet, or aiming at a person’s head, groin or spine, but lawyers argued that officers did so.
Another lawyer said that the department also appears to be breaking its rules governing the use of 40 millimeters by shooting journalists and other sensitive areas such as the head.
“And they shouldn’t be shooting them in the head as they’re trying to leave,” said Carol Sobel, an attorney leading a lawsuit that forced the LAPD to reverse its past brutal crowd control practices. “The bottom line is that the LAPD is going to sink the city with its refusal to follow the law.”
The motion also cited a ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that found such weapons should not be used to disperse crowds. It was the latest legal challenge to the use of the 40-millimeter, which the LAPD also uses in daily operations. The order does not apply to such use.
Previously, the department issued the same, if the use of other explosive weapons called skip and beanbag rounds was temporarily suspended.
This week the City Council voted for new restrictions on the LAPD’s deployment of police officers to protests, encouraging a “high-level response” in which officers in riot gear will be sent only if necessary.
Los Angeles police have faced numerous allegations of excessive force during protests against the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigrants last summer. The department’s response has already led to lawsuits, including from the Los Angeles Press Club, pointing to video evidence and a wealth of evidence suggesting law enforcement violated its guidelines and state law.
Earlier this year a different judge issued an order barring the LAPD from using non-lethal weapons against journalists and non-violent protesters – a decision that is subject to appeal.
Attorneys for the City of Los Angeles and the Department of Homeland Security previously argued that the judge’s ban was impractical and overly broad. While police can now use non-lethal weapons to contain unruly protesters, the city said the rules put officers at risk of hesitation in chaotic situations.
