#1033 program

what is the 1033 program?

The U.S. Department of Defense administers the 1033 program, which transfers excess military equipment to U.S. police forces—federal, state and local. This program has so far sent $6 billion in military gear to police departments. The militarized police responses seen in Ferguson in 2014, Baltimore in 2015 and in cities throughout the country during the 2020 uprisings after George Floyd’s murder can be directly attributed to the 1033 program.

If you’re watching in horror as clearly undertrained cops roll up to protests with military gear, perhaps in tanks, definitely with military weapons, you have the 1033 program to thank for that.

An important thing to know about the US Military is there is a MASSIVE surplus in military equipment (vehicles, weapons, uniforms and gear). The military doesn’t need billions of dollars of equipment--use of tanks and all this other gear isn’t in extremely high demand--which means the suppliers are in a very “fragile” place. If there’s no demand, they struggle to get profit off of their supply.

So, the government effectively subsidizes them by ordering BILLIONS of dollars in extraneous equipment. Lots of this is literally received and immediately destroyed. Lots of it is put into fields and warehouses to rot and rust.

And, because of the 1033 program, a lot of it goes to cops. This started as a facet of the war on drugs (which we all know was about racism and classism but like... mostly antiblack racism) where a MILITARIZED RESPONSE was called on drug offenses. The 1033 program started to justify capitalism (”at least the surplus of weapons are finally having a use! we’re spending smartly now!”) and to further white supremacy.

There’s of course a thread to follow in understanding the environmental effects of mass production of military gear that is literally made just to justify a purchase and to support the military industry but this is about white supremacy. And how capitalism only serves to further it.

You cannot be anti-racist (or pro-environment) and be pro-capitalism. Or pro-military. Or pro-cops.

But all of these things are intricately connected.

In response to the outrage from citizens seeing militarized vehicles at the Ferguson protests, Obama signed an Executive Order restricting (but NOT abolishing) the 1033 program. Trump undid the order in 2017.

We are going to see even more military AND pseudo-military responses to protests. And these cops are not effectively trained to use this gear. Not to say them being trained to use it would make it less horrifying, just that there is a singular type of terror that comes with the fact that our government is merrily giving military grade weapons to cops just because they bought too much and they only bought too much to support terror in the middle east (and everywhere else).

Amee Vanderpool at SHERO:

Last week, the Trump administration took a step to nullify substantial advances in federal oversight of police reform for problematic police departments across the United States. This move was intended to annihilate the advancements previously made by the Biden administration to curtail police and overhaul local law enforcement. Justice Department officials confirmed that they plan to drop cases involving incidents of police violence that have been filed in Minneapolis and Louisville, and officials will close investigations into departments all across the country. This latest intentional step backward was implemented less than a month after Donald Trump issued an executive order titled Strengthening and Unleashing America’s Law Enforcement to Pursue Criminals and Protect Innocent Citizens. The April mandate (1) directs federal resources to promote aggressive policing tactics and further militarize local law enforcement agencies, (2) provides greater protections for law enforcement officers accused of misconduct, and (3) wields threats of possible federal prosecutions for certain activities, including specific “diversity, equity, and inclusion” initiatives. While it is fair to say that some law enforcement leaders may refuse to implement the strategies and ideologies issued in Trump’s directive and may refuse to use any “new best practices” urged by his administration, some pivotal federal grants that states rely upon are overseen by the Department of Justice. This means that Donald Trump can attempt to ensure full participation from reluctant state leaders by refusing to fund some grant disbursements without complete compliance. This mandate ultimately incentivizes the use of aggressive tactics by all local and state law enforcement to “aggressively police communities against all crimes.” This strategy, also known as the Broken Windows approach, is an aggressive crime-fighting strategy instituted in New York City in the 1990s, emphasizing mass arrest of perpetrators for major and minor offenses. The project was ultimately deemed unsuccessful after the impact resulted in disproportionate arrests of Black and Hispanic youths as compared to Caucasians. It also generated a substantial financial burden on the criminal justice system by channeling the limited resources for social programs into punishment and incarceration, a move that has helped create the current failed governmental policy known as the corporate, for-profit prison system.

In 1990, Congress created the Department of Defense’s 1033 program to designate surplus military equipment that could be transferred to local law enforcement for crowd control measures during active protests. The total acquisition value of equipment transferred to various states and local authorities since the program’s inception in 1990 is $7.6 billion. [...] Martial law is roughly defined as the temporary rule by military authorities of a designated area in an emergency when the civil authorities are deemed unable to function. The result is the suspension of regularly enacted civil rights and the extension of military justice or military law to the general public. A supreme political authority can legally establish military rule in wartime. Luther v. Borden established the "political question" doctrine, which prevents federal courts of the Judicial Branch from reviewing certain matters deemed best left to Congress and the US President, which comprise the political branches of government. That ruling was further restricted after the Civil War when a divided Court established that it was unlawful to refuse the Due Process rights of civilians by subjecting them to a military tribunal trial if a civilian court was available. This was the case that involved Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus in September 1863 that Republicans of today love to reference when discussing Donald Trump’s recent moves to deport people without a proper hearing. It is important to note two major faults in the premise that is often incorrectly touted by Trump allies — the Supreme Court in Ex parte Milligan found that Lincoln had overstepped his authority by suspending Habeus Corpus, with the order being subsequently voided, and the United States is not currently at war.