
The end of federal oversight and calls to pardon George Floyd's convicted killer could undermine police reforms, Minneapolis leaders warn
It's been almost five years since the world watched George Floyd beg for his life as a White police officer in Minneapolis knelt on the Black father's neck for more than 9 minutes.
After a bystander's video of Floyd's death sparked nationwide calls for an end to police impunity and brutality, the officer, Derek Chauvin, was fired. A state jury ultimately convicted him of murder, and he pleaded guilty to federal civil rights violations, netting him more than two decades in prison.
Meanwhile, leaders in Minneapolis – in separate partnerships with the US Justice Department and state officials – began implementing policing reforms to try to prevent any such tragedy from happening again.
Those federal efforts came to an abrupt halt Wednesday as the Trump administration announced it would end its oversight of policing reforms through court-authorized consent decrees in cities including Minneapolis, Phoenix and Louisville, Kentucky.
The move complicates the path toward ensuring more fair policing in Minneapolis, leaders there told CNN, just as some activists and lawmakers on the political right are urging President Donald Trump to pardon Chauvin, a campaign that some also see as chipping away at gains toward racial justice.
When asked outright in March if he was considering pardoning Chauvin, Trump told White House reporters, 'No, I haven't even heard about it,' and his administration since then has not signaled he's interested in pursuing the matter.
Still, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, the GOP firebrand from Georgia, wrote last week on social media: 'I strongly support Derek Chauvin being pardoned and released from prison.' Right-wing commentator Ben Shapiro launched a pardon campaign in March to encourage Trump to do the same, in part with a nod from White House confidant and billionaire Elon Musk.
Greene also resurfaced, without evidence, the argument refuted by medical officials and rejected by a state jury of Chauvin's peers that 'Floyd died of a drug overdose.'
'Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in front of the whole world,' Democratic Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison told CNN this week, noting his office 'proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Chauvin asphyxiated Floyd.'
'The only conceivable purpose' of a pardon, Ellison added, 'would be to express yet more disrespect for George Floyd and more disrespect for the rule of law.'
For Floyd's brother, Terrence, calls to pardon Chauvin are like 'reinjuring … reopening a wound,' he told CNN in March.
'This is the fifth year, we were supposed to see progress,' Terrence Floyd said. 'So many things was promised to us as a people – not just to Black and Brown people, but as a people – and now they're backpedaling.'
Practically, a Trump pardon likely would mean little more than a change of address for Chauvin because it only would apply to his 21-year sentence on the federal charges, which the ex-officer has been serving in a federal prison in Texas concurrently with his 22 ½ year state sentence.
'A pardon of Chauvin's federal conviction would return him to Minnesota to serve the rest of his sentence in state prison,' Ellison said.
But the mounting discussions of a pardon and the Trump administration's months-long delay of consent decree proceedings have had leaders in Minnesota preparing for the end of federal oversight of the Minneapolis Police Department – and considering how to maintain momentum for reform, even without support from Washington.
A Justice Department report in 2023 linked directly to Floyd's death found 'systemic problems' at the city agency, including racial discrimination, excessive and unlawful use of force, First Amendment violations and a lack of officer accountability.
That same year, the Minnesota Department of Human Rights and the city of Minneapolis reached an agreement in state court to address race-based policing and bring 'transformational changes' to the city's police department. The deal centers on changing the culture of the city's police by creating 'clear, effective policies' and providing strong accountability and oversight.
The agreement, in part, 'require(s) officers to de-escalate,' 'prohibit(s) officers from using force to punish or retaliate' and limits how they can use stun guns, chemical irritants and force. It also mandates the city and the police agency 'conduct thorough investigations of police misconduct.'
Then, weeks before Trump's inauguration this January, the Minneapolis City Council approved a separate consent decree with the federal government that also would have mandated major reforms.
Just days into Trump's second term, however, his administration announced it would halt federal oversight of police reforms, and in late April, Trump signed an executive order mandating his Justice Department to 'review all ongoing Federal consent decrees … and modify, rescind, or move to conclude such measures that unduly impede the performance of law enforcement functions.'
Minneapolis' mayor has pledged police reforms will still be enacted despite Wednesday's announcement by the Trump administration.
'We're doing it anyway. We will implement every reform outlined in the consent decree because accountability isn't optional,' said Mayor Jacob Frey, a Democrat who's had the job since 2018. 'Our independent monitor has lauded the meaningful progress we've made under the state settlement agreement, and the public can count on clear, measurable proof that our reforms are moving forward.'
'While the Department of Justice walks away from their federal consent decree nearly five years from the murder of George Floyd, our Department and the state court consent decree isn't going anywhere,' Minnesota Department of Human Rights Commissioner Rebecca Lucero said Wednesday.
'Under the state agreement, the City and MPD must make transformational changes to address race-based policing. The tremendous amount of work that lies ahead for the City, including MPD, cannot be understated. And our Department will be here every step of the way.'
Still, Frey's assurances must be backed by consistent action, something that even with good intentions could be a challenge without federal supervision, longtime advocates for policing reform in Minneapolis told CNN.
Communities United Against Police Brutality spent years going door-to-door teaching city residents about the importance of a consent decree to govern policing reforms and gathering testimony about their encounters with the police department – all with the aim of informing better policies, said the president of the 25-year-old group, Michelle Gross.
Now, the organization stands ready to sue on behalf of the community to keep the federal consent decree, Gross told CNN.
'It's really important that that we don't just say, 'Well, you know, that was a nice experiment. Let's move on,'' she said. 'You effect cultural change by laying out your expectations, rewarding the good behavior and addressing the bad behavior through discipline and other means.'
What's more, for a community that's only just starting to heal five years after Floyd's death, pardoning Chauvin and backtracking on policing reforms would be like 'pouring salt in the wound,' Gross said.
'I'm distressed that the current administration believes that police need to somehow be 'unleashed,'' she said, quoting from the title of Trump's executive action on policing: 'Strengthening and Unleashing America's Law Enforcement to Pursue Criminals and Protect Innocent Citizens.'
'Law enforcement does have a function … and it's a necessary job,' Gross said. 'But trampling on people's rights is not necessary to do that job, and we shouldn't tolerate it as a country.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fox News
19 minutes ago
- Fox News
Rep. Alford to introduce congressional stock trading ban mirroring Senate's 'PELOSI Act'
FIRST ON FOX: Rep. Mark Alford, R-Mo., on Wednesday will introduce legislation that would ban congressional stock trading, serving as the House companion bill to Sen. Josh Hawley's, R-Mo., "PELOSI Act" in the Senate. Alford's proposed bill would ban lawmakers and their spouses from holding, purchasing or selling individual stocks while in office, but it allows investments in diversified mutual funds, exchange-traded funds or U.S. Treasury bonds. If passed, current lawmakers would have 180 days to comply with the legislation. Likewise, newly elected lawmakers must achieve compliance within 180 days of entering office. "As public servants, we should hold ourselves to a higher standard and avoid the mere appearance of corruption," Alford said in a statement. "Unfortunately, too many members of Congress are engaging in suspicious stock trades based on non-public information to enrich themselves." "These gross violations of the public trust make clear: we must finally take action to ban members and their spouses from owning or selling individual stocks," he added. Under the proposed legislation, lawmakers who continue to make wrongful transactions would be required to hand over any profits they made to the U.S. Treasury Department. The House or Senate ethics committees could also impose a fine on such lawmakers amounting to 10% of each wrongful transaction. House Speaker Mike Johnson endorsed a stock trading ban on Wednesday, saying "a few bad actors" have ruined Americans' trust in lawmakers on the issue. "You want me to tell you my honest opinion on that? I'm in favor of that, because I don't think we should have any appearance of impropriety here," he told reporters during a press conference. President Donald Trump himself endorsed the same ban for members of Congress in an interview with Time magazine last month. "I watched Nancy Pelosi get rich through insider information, and I would be okay with it. If they send that to me, I would do it," he said of a trading ban. "You'll sign it?" the reporter pressed. "Absolutely," Trump responded. Democrats in the House of Representatives have also expressed support for a ban, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., throwing his weight behind the proposal last week.


CBS News
20 minutes ago
- CBS News
Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map
Less than a day after Tarrant County commissioners approved a controversial redistricting proposal, a group of citizens filed a lawsuit claiming intentional discrimination. According to the Lone Star Project, the lawsuit claims that Tarrant County Judge Tim O'Hare and his followers engaged in intentional racial discrimination in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution by drawing the new district lines. "Intentional discrimination is still against the law," said lead legal counsel for the citizen plaintiffs, Chad Dunn. "The map they drew, the process they used to draw it, and the animosity shown to the citizens of Tarrant County violate the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution." Hundreds of residents speak out for, against the redistricting More than 200 people spoke out about redrawing boundary lines during public comment Tuesday night. The majority who spoke were against redistricting, including the mayors of Arlington, Mansfield and Forest Hills. There were still several speakers who expressed their support. Several used the phrase "don't Dallas my Tarrant." Tarrant County "I want to say that I fully support deterring redistricting efforts. These lines haven't been updated since 2010," said Carlos Turcios, the community development committee chairman for the Tarrant Republican Party. Commissioners moved into executive session around 3 p.m. on Tuesday after some tense moments between the two Democrats and the three Republicans. As Commissioner Alisa Simmons expressed all the reasons she is against redistricting, Judge Tim O'Hare abruptly moved to executive session in an effort to limit her comments. O'Hare is spearheading this process and has been clear that it's about partisan politics. He wants another Republican seat on the court to ensure conservative leadership for the next decade. "It's a very divided country and the parties, I'm not sure, have never been further apart in their beliefs," O'Hare said. "I don't apologize for being a Republican. I don't apologize for being a conservative." "It's not partisan. It is racism." Critics believe the redistricting is racial gerrymandering, saying it goes beyond partisan politics and say it dilutes the voting power of minorities. "Absolutely, it's not partisan. It is racism," Simmons said during the meeting. The new map does appear to take areas with high Black and brown populations from precinct two and put them in precinct one. SMU political science professor Calvin Jillson said what the court did is not unusual, but the legality of the new lines comes down to intentions. "Oh, this absolutely gerrymandering – it is the redrawing of electoral boundaries for partisan purposes," Jillson said. "The question is whether the purposes behind the redrawing were actually political, in which case gerrymandering is legal, or racial discrimination, in which case it would not be legal." Check out more on the CBS News Texas YouTube page: contributed to this report.


Bloomberg
21 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
US Economic Data Showing Slowdown; Trump Reshapes DEI
"Bloomberg Markets" follows the market moves across every global asset class and discusses the biggest issues for Wall Street. On the show today, Tidalwave Solutions Senior Partner Cameron Johnson, Waystar Technologies CEO Matthew Hawkins, The Verna Myers Company Diversity Pioneer Vernā Myers. (Source: Bloomberg)