Reichert, Pascrell, Hatch, Feinstein, Tillis, Manchin, Introduce Bill to Empower and Protect Probation Officers

Washington, D.C.—This week, Rep. Dave Reichert (R-WA), a law enforcement veteran of 33 years,  Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-NJ), and Senators Orrin Hatch (R-U), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Thom Tillis (R-NC), and Joe Manchin (D-WV) introduced the Probation Officer Protection Act of 2017—a bill that will protect probation officers and enhance their ability to do their job by giving them authority to arrest a third party who forcibly interferes with an officer’s performance of his or her official duties.

“Hostile and at times threatening environments are part of a probation officer’s average day on the job,” said Rep. Reichert. “Although they encounter many of the same dangers faced by members of the law enforcement community, they do not have the same tools to protect themselves. This bipartisan, bicameral bill rights that wrong.”

"Probation officers face challenging and difficult situations every day where they can encounter violent physical threats from parolees or a third party in the vicinity," said Rep. Pascrell. "However, current law prohibits these officers from having the authority to protect themselves from carrying out their duties. This bipartisan bill will simply give probation officers the authority to protect themselves and prohibit third parties from interfering with an officer’s performance or official duties."

“This commonsense, bipartisan legislation helps to ensure that federal probation officers have the proper tools and authority necessary to protect themselves from hostile individuals who may attempt to harm them or otherwise interfere while they perform their important work,” Senator Hatch said. “This bill also supports our men and women in law enforcement by freeing up precious time and resources for the local police, who will no longer need to accompany and provide backup for probation officers. Because many states already grant state probation officers authority to arrest third parties who forcibly interfere with an officer’s performance of his or her official duties, it only makes sense to give federal probation officers the same authority.”

“Probation officers are often placed in compromising situations when they search properties for contraband,” Senator Feinstein said. “Friends and relatives of individuals on probation may threaten violence or block them from conducting their search. This has happened several times in California. Our bill addresses this problem by allowing probation officers to arrest individuals who try to stop them from doing their jobs.”

“Probation officers play a critical role in our criminal justice system by promoting public safety and working with offenders to manage risks and reduce recidivism ,” said Senator Tillis. “Our probation officers also need the ability to protect themselves, and this bipartisan legislation will give them the necessary authority to arrest individuals who threaten their safety or interfere with their job performance that is so crucial to the safety of our communities.”

“Our law enforcement officers throughout West Virginia and across the country go above and beyond to protect our communities. Our probation officers need the authority to do their jobs, and I am proud to be an original cosponsor on this bill that will ensure they are able to protect the communities they serve and make us all safer,” said Senator Manchin. 

Statements of Support 

Honorable Ricardo S. Martinez, Chair, Committee on Criminal Law, Judicial Conference of the United States

“As Chair of the Committee on Criminal Law of the Judicial Conference of the United States, which oversees the federal probation system, I am writing to express our support for the Probation Officer Protection Act, which would give probation officers the authority to temporarily direct, and if necessary to arrest, a person who is obstructing the officer while performing their official duties. This limited authority would allow probation officers to do their job safely and effectively. We greatly appreciate your leadership and support for this modest but much-needed reform.” 

Craig F. Penet, President, Federal Probation and Pretrial Officers Association  

“Without the appropriate tools to confront and address hostile and aggressive third parties, U.S. Probation Officers are left with little choice but to abandon searches — potentially allowing evidence/contraband to remain in the community. FPPOA strongly urges Congress to act on tis bill as a necessary policy reform that will have a significant impact on officer safety.” 

Nathan Catura, National President, Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association  

“I am writing on behalf of the more than 27,000 members of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association to advise you of our strong support for legislation you intend to reintroduce entitled the “Probation Officer Protection Act.” Thank you for your continued leadership on this important officer safety issue.” 

“As the volume of approved searches they must conduct has markedly increased over the past year, the absence of any authority to restrain or direct the movements of third parties places Probation Officers at a greater and unnecessary risk of physical harm. That is why the 'Probation Officer Protection Act' is so important.” 

Background

Under current law, a federal probation officer may arrest a probationer or individual on supervised release if the officer has probable cause to believe that the offender has violated a condition of his or her probation or release. See 18 U.S.C. § 3606. The officer may make the arrest with or without a warrant.

In practice, formal arrests by probation officers are rare. Rather, probation officers use this authority to lawfully engage in less restrictive uses of force, such as ordering an offender to stand aside during a search; instructing an offender not to interfere with the officer’s movements; or, in rare cases, temporarily restraining an offender who poses a physical danger.

Current law does not, however, address a probation officer’s arrest authority in situations where a third party attempts to physically obstruct the officer or cause the officer physical harm. Although obstructing a probation officer in the performance of his or her official duties is illegal, when a probation officer encounters an uncooperative or violent third party, the officer may be forced to retreat because he or she lacks authority to restrain the third party. This lack of authority and resulting need to retreat exposes probation officers to greater risk of harm and allows the third party—along with any evidence or individual the third party is attempting to shield—to elude capture. As a result, evidence that an offender has violated a condition of his or her probation or supervised release, or evidence of other criminal activity, may be lost.

In some circumstances, a probation officer may be able to enlist the assistance of local police in responding to a hostile third party. But this is not, in and of itself, an adequate solution. First, unless the probation officer knows in advance that he or she is likely to encounter a hostile third party and can find an available police officer to accompany him or her, the probation officer must wait for police backup to arrive. This is often not a viable option. Second, even if a local police officer is available to accompany the probation officer, because the probation officer lacks arrest authority, he or she cannot lawfully assist the police officer if the police officer is accosted. Third, requiring federal probation officers to rely on local law enforcement in responding to uncooperative or violent third parties burdens local police departments and diverts police resources from other uses.