Introduction
The American public safety industry’s primary goals are to innovate products and provide services that safeguard citizens and property security. The US ensures public safety at local, state, and federal levels, using multiple agencies and units in public and private sectors to ensure no part of America remains unguarded. However, public agencies attract the most attention because their service designs and national significance have a bearing on the government’s responsibility to utilise public resources for holistic protection. Therefore, two comparable public safety units in America are the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Local Police Force, which are in high demand for protection services, given the drastic increases in national violence in the past decade. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the interactions of the two agencies in lawmaking and order by examining their structural responsibilities as captured in the state and federal laws. The primary argument is that the US government must adjust Local Police and DHS effectiveness through funding and restructured laws to match the agencies’ powers with critical security needs on the American streets.
Procedural Functions
The most significant procedural function for all public safety agencies is the first responders during emergencies and crime prevention. The global adjustments in technological adoption and other social interaction patterns, not forgetting climate change impacts on community emergencies, create multiple scenarios for the first response (American Bar Association, 2022). A community can undergo cyber-attacks, illegal drug distribution and associated violent aggressions, weapon attacks, and climate-related emergencies such as storms and hurricanes, creating the need for interventions and hastened emergency responses (Police Executive Research Forum, 2017). State, local, and federal agencies train personnel on specialised functions such as investigation and crime detection, law enforcement, EMT roles, patrol, firefighting, and forensics investigations (Police Executive Research Forum, 2017). Although some of the functions can be hired by commercial firms with specialised units and experience in handling solutions to community security threats, the roles played by DHS and American Local Police override the private system. Some of the reasons are that the two agencies have the most enhanced public presence and continuously-evolving response techniques to combat crimes.
DHS Functions
The Department of Homeland Security is the primary federal source of security information for the public safety partners such as local, state, or commercial agencies. Therefore, the DHS’s first function is to prepare and mitigate security threats, especially those resulting from organised terror activities (Homeland Security, 2021). The DHS gathers security intelligence on planned attacks from any part of the world, an investigative role that requires multi-national and cross-border collaborations to safeguard public safety effectiveness. Although the agency stated that most national security threats are non-terrorist, DHS’s intelligence gathering must encompass terror and other planned aggressions from non-terrorists (Homeland Security, 2021). Other than gathering intelligence, the DHS must mitigate security threats by sharing intelligence with law enforcement agencies within the US or across the border, ensuring that the agencies apprehend suspected criminals before attacks.
The DHS protects US leaders and top-profile visits by ensuring safety for important events. The large-scale protection capabilities make the unit critically function in the US public security industry, especially the agency’s role in using technology to avert threats to national events. The DHS uses several technologies to perform its key functions, including artificial intelligence (AI) devices, sensors, drones, and automated investigative techniques (Homeland Security, 2021). The DHS prioritises innovative technology adoption for increasing security effectiveness to ensure optimised operations and mission achievement using the most reliable methods. The government must allocate adequate resources to the agency, ensuring it meets its core functions without endangering personnel or civilian lives.
US Border protection is one broad DHS function encompassing air, land, and water surveillance and immigration law enforcement to ensure balanced national interests for existing civilians and new entrants. Immigration law enforcement is one of the most challenging DHS functions, where the agency has to ensure that only permitted individuals and US citizens reside within the country. Because the DHS ensures visitors do not overstay, the agency has to keep track of all travellers crossing US borders, their visiting durations, and facilitations for their safe returns in case an individual overstays. According to Homeland Security (2021), DHS accords visitors with legal documents with the same rights as US citizens. This equality dimension exemplifies the diverse roles played by the agency in promoting national interests within their law-keeping roles. However, since law keeping/enforcement is also the most notable role of the US Local Police Force, it is important to analyse and compare how the agency’s functions compare or contrast with DHS’s.
Local Police Force Functions and DHS Comparison/Contrast
One of the key functions of the American Local Police Force is immigration law enforcement through localised border control authorities. Some states administer the function controversially through conflicted policies by various state governments, allowing law enforcement officers to inquire about individuals’ immigration status for those they encounter. According to Wasayi et al. (2018), the policy is controversial because it promotes citizen profiling, where officers are likely to be biassed against immigrants. Wasayi et al. (2018) observed that American policing is mostly a localised affair, regardless of the government level of hiring law enforcement officers. Therefore, state mandates on “show me your papers” policies and other immigration enforcement laws corroborate the idea that police forces engage communities at the most levels (Wasayi et al., 2018). The Local Police Force and the DHS interact during immigration enforcement, with the latter dedicating an entire department for liaised data sharing and comprehensive border control to ensure national security.
Partner engagements exemplify interaction mechanisms between the Local Police and the Department of Homeland Security. Homeland Security (2022 a) elaborated that the Office for State and Local Law Enforcement (OSLLE) is a commission for fostering collaborations between the agency and Local Police Forces. OSLER’s major role is coordinating countrywide security policies pertinent to the local, state, and territorial laws for every region in the United States (Homeland Security, 2022 a). OSLLE also links DHS with other non-federal law enforcement agencies in the United States. There are three distinct engagement activities: relationship cultivation through portfolio sharing, sending Local Police to represent the DHS at security conferences and securing official engagements through collaborative intelligence sharing in common databases (Homeland Security, 2022 a). Although the Local Police manage resource integration with the DHS for comprehensive border control and security assurance, other similar functions between the two departments are non-collaborative.
Police officers identify and, where appropriate, arrest lawbreakers, subjecting the offenders to an established criminal justice system for further correction. According to the American Bar Association (2022), the Local Police reduce crime through preventive patrol or community engagements to gather information on criminal offenders. Comparably, the Local Police perform similar roles as the DHS during patrols and intelligence gathering. However, the former must have the technology or cross-border collaborative capabilities to improve the law enforcement scope. One contrast between the DHS and Local Police functions is that. In contrast, the former acts as first responders during a patrol, and the DHS liaises with other local enforcement agencies for offender apprehension. The only emergency response tasks allocated to the DHS are critical disaster scenarios such as fire outbreaks or climate-related crises like storms and hurricanes.
The Local Police preserve law and order in American public places, although law enforcement can encompass conflict resolution. The Local Police are the most decentralised public security agency whose other critical role is to create and maintain a sense of security within the communities where they are attached (American Bar Association, 2022). Therefore, Local Police authorities can serve as detectives, using plainclothes officers to penetrate community barriers and gather information about a crime incident. Unlike the DHS detective roles that encompass collaborative intelligence sharing with relevant federal and local enforcement authorities, the Local Police have the independent power to round up suspects or participate in community raids during investigations (American Bar Association, 2022). Therefore, the distinct procedural functions of the DHS and Local Police Force complement national security enforcement. The reason for differences in law enforcement procedures is that different state and federal laws govern each of the two agencies’ functions.
State and Federal Laws Governing Security Actions
DHS Federal Laws
Different Federal laws governing DHS security actions address the agency’s various roles, such as emergency management, immigration, border security, and maritime and transportation safety functions. General laws, such as the Homeland Security Act 2002, govern information security and the use of science and technology in national law enforcement (Homeland Security, 2022 b). The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 outlines DHS’s roles in conducting immigration procedures and transportation security functions (Homeland Security, 2022 b). The federal law outlining DHS roles in emergency response is the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006, which required the DHS to enhance national response to disasters (Homeland Security, 2022 b). The Immigration and Nationality Act outlines the DHS’s functions in investigating asylum requests or conducting investigations on human trafficking syndicates (Homeland Security, 2022 b). Regulatory action on DHS using laws passed by Congress and enacted by the President promotes the agency’s role clarification based on the identified national security interests. Therefore, since the DHS and the Local Police share similar functions, it is important to understand how different laws for each agency separate their roles in promoting national security.
Local Police: State and Federal Laws
The US Department of Justice enforces Federal laws for governing Local Police conduct and general law enforcement functions, ensuring that the officers comply with the legal and ethical guidelines for interacting with local communities. According to the US Department of Justice (2020), the federal government monitors law enforcement conduct using the “Under colour of law” outlines (18 USC §§ 241, 242) which outlines police authority and arrest procedures. The law governs other deviance and misconduct by law enforcement officers, including evidence tampering, false arrests, and property destruction or theft (US Department of Justice, 2020). State laws governing Local Police conduct vary depending on the location, although the common language clarifies police authority and crime prevention responsibilities. The State of California Department of Justice (2022) regulates Local Police conduct through the Attorney General’s Division. The state requires law enforcement officers to perform three major duties: criminal investigations, evidence preparation using forensic analysis technologies, and regulatory oversight.
Unlike the DHS, whose major laws are anchored on federal guidelines, Local Police enforcement laws are subject to change by state officials or even the governor. The Congressional Research Service (2020) detailed that the federalized system in US governance limits the roles Congress plays in enforcing police conduct laws at state and local levels. However, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) influences policing because it is the agency responsible for enforcing federal laws regarding abuse of power (Congressional Research Service, 2020). The DOJ enacts policies regarding police conduct at local, state, and federal levels, providing adequate personnel training for the new frameworks (Congressional Research Service, 2020). Therefore, the federal government can push for policing reforms through the DOJ, albeit the power is limited when considering how local and state laws can override federal police conduct frameworks.
DHS and Local Police Interactions within Public Safety Systems
The DHS and Local Police interact with other agencies to round up security assurance measures in the United States. However, the interactions between DHS and Local Law enforcement are the cornerstone for ensuring national security, where strategy coordination can only be practically impossible with consulting officers closer to the communities (Waldorf University, 2018). Therefore, the two agencies use three major techniques, such as social network building, interdisciplinary partnerships, and shared intelligence, to increase the national security capacity. Waldorf University (2018) insisted that the two agencies can only achieve adequate collaborative goal achievement by building relationships of trust. The implication is that the DHS, depending on Local Police for intelligence sharing, should organise combined training for integrated professional advancement, especially on the latest crime control technologies.
Social Network Building
Policing an interconnected world requires an equivalent social network building to enhance interactions between law enforcement agencies and the communities under investigation. The DHS and Local Police agencies collaborate to implement a social network analysis (SNA) system which fosters interagency interaction in public safety (Papachristos & Sierra-Arévalo, 2018). The SNA roles in violence reduction enforcement contexts entail group-level information gathering and relationship mapping to establish the risks posed by a social group or a digital network community (Papachristos & Sierra-Arévalo, 2018). Therefore, the key role of DHS and Local Police administrators in SNA violence investigations is to provide training materials and relevant software for intelligence collection. The administrators must ensure adequate officer sensitization on the ethical standards about suspect privacy and information sharing on social networks.
Interdisciplinary Partnerships
Interdisciplinary partnerships between the DHS and Local Police promote interactions for combating violent extremism and addressing identity issues challenging youths in immigrant communities. Police Executive Research Forum (2017) insisted that preventing violent extremism is a local affair, implying that the DHS must liaise with Local Police to investigate pertinent community conditions and demographic-based risks. An example is the identity challenges by youths and young children in immigrant communities who are likely to join gangs because of cultural confusion. Police Executive Research Forum (2017) clarified that joint interactions between the DHS and Local Police enhance community outreach activities for solidifying adolescent identities and discouraging delinquency. Therefore, interdisciplinary partnerships promote resiliency building and contingency planning for addressing lawbreaking among communities with culturally vulnerable populations.
Possible Agency Reforms
Although the DHS and the Local Police Force use robust crime prevention techniques, including intelligence sharing and interdisciplinary working, several public controversies exist regarding the agencies’ effectiveness. One of the challenges associated with Local Police units is using authority while conducting patrols, investigations, and other community engagement practices that require strict adherence to ethical principles (Ray & Neily, 2021). However, the DHS reforms are necessary for matching the agency’s proficiencies to modern challenges regarding cyber-attacks, staff morale boosting, and using force during investigations (Thompson, 2021). Interestingly, an interdisciplinary reform process would strengthen interaction patterns for the collaborative units, albeit the path is harder to achieve now that the DHS works with federal laws, whereas the Local Police work with state laws.
Local Police Reforms
The Local Police reforms should address officer corruption, criminality, abuse of authority, misconduct, and excessive use of force. According to Ray and Neily (2021), the federal government, through the DOJ and state government, should promote short- and long-term reforms for managing integrity issues in law enforcement. One of the instant reforms to promote policing accountability is the revised qualified immunity. According to Ray and Neily (2021), qualified immunity reforms should entail heightened officer exposure to accountability for every policing outcome. Protecting officers from legal proceedings promotes impunity and abuse of police authority because the law cannot hold rogue personnel accountable for incidents such as unjustified murder, excessive use of force, or evidence tampering. Qualified immunity reforms should go hand in hand with introducing new national standards for officer training and de-escalation (Ray & Neily, 2021). The new guidelines should pair expected conduct with punitive measures for officers to practise deviance. Most importantly, the government should change the police culture towards a community engagement approach, rather than traditional policing, as a long-term national security achievement goal.
DHS Reforms
DHS reforms should promote agency preparedness for modern challenges and job demands, teachable skills, and experiences in handling security matters. One of the reforms should entail a paradigm shift from a threat-oriented model to a safety and services technique. According to Rudman et al. (2021), the current DHS functions promote an imbalance between community-oriented roles and threat-based national security initiatives. That implies the DHS does more on protecting, securing, preventing, and enforcing at the expense of connecting, communicating, facilitating, welcoming, or helping (Rudman et al., 2021). A system reform would entail a balanced approach where the community service features get equalised priorities as the threat-neutralisation features. The DHS should invest more in local, state, and federal collaborations, enhance intelligence communication channels to promote reliable information dissemination, and incorporate a helping and welcoming culture for engaging local communities.
Conclusion
The DHS and the Local Police Force interact on multiple platforms, given their intersecting roles in promoting national security. Similarities in the agencies’ functions are investigations, patrol, and immigration law enforcement through border security control. The DHS and Local Police interact on key procedural functions through information sharing and joint force actions under the Office for State and Local Law Enforcement (OSLLE). Social network building and interdisciplinary partnerships are the two most common techniques used by the DHS and local law enforcement to navigate community challenges regarding population vulnerability or delinquency risks. The agencies’ national security frameworks, governed by state and federal laws, are insufficient to promote performance excellence. Therefore, there is a need for reforms to control deviance and other integrity issues associated with DHS and Local Police, such as corruption, brutality, and general misconduct. The most viable solution is a culture change by introducing the safety and services model as a replacement for the threat-oriented model. The US government must adjust Local Police and DHS effectiveness through funding and restructured laws to match the agencies’ powers with critical security needs on the American streets.
References
American Bar Association. (2022). Police function. Web.
Congressional Research Service. (2020). What role might the federal government play in law enforcement reform? Web.
Homeland Security. (2021). Helping when disaster strikes. Web.
Homeland Security. (2022, a). What does DHS do? Web.
Homeland Security. (2022, b). Key DHS laws. Web.
Papachristos, A., & Sierra-Arévalo, M. (2018). Policing the connected world. COPS. Web.
Police Executive Research Forum. (2017). Building interdisciplinary partnerships to prevent violent extremism. COPS. Web.
Ray, R. & Neily, C. (2021). A better path forward for criminal justice: Police reform. Brookings. Web.
Rudman, M., deLeon, R., & Martinez, J. (2021). Redefining Homeland Security: A new framework for DHS to meet today’s challenges. CAP. Web.
State of California Department of Justice. (2022). Law enforcement. Web.
Thompson, B. (2021). The “Department of Homeland Security Reform Act of 2021.” Committee on Homeland Security. Web.
US Department of Justice. (2020). Addressing police misconduct laws enforced by The Department of Justice. Web.
Waldorf University. (2018). Why local law enforcement is a cornerstone of homeland security. Corrections1. Web.