Harmeet Dhillon

and a monitor decides when you're good enough and your performance has improved, you get more monitoring. You get more years of that. You get more fees paid to big law firms like Hogan Lovells and some other big law firms in the United States. And the citizens pay the bill. So it's a tax on Americans who live in cities because one cop, or maybe no cops in some cases, did something wrong.

and a monitor decides when you're good enough and your performance has improved, you get more monitoring. You get more years of that. You get more fees paid to big law firms like Hogan Lovells and some other big law firms in the United States. And the citizens pay the bill. So it's a tax on Americans who live in cities because one cop, or maybe no cops in some cases, did something wrong.

And so it's a totally broken system. And when we came into office, it was a priority of this administration to review all pending consent decrees, all consent decrees that had yet to be entered by a judge, all pre-consent decree factual findings found by the Department of Justice and announced publicly shaming these cities, and look at the data and see, are these really justified?

And so it's a totally broken system. And when we came into office, it was a priority of this administration to review all pending consent decrees, all consent decrees that had yet to be entered by a judge, all pre-consent decree factual findings found by the Department of Justice and announced publicly shaming these cities, and look at the data and see, are these really justified?

And so it's a totally broken system. And when we came into office, it was a priority of this administration to review all pending consent decrees, all consent decrees that had yet to be entered by a judge, all pre-consent decree factual findings found by the Department of Justice and announced publicly shaming these cities, and look at the data and see, are these really justified?

And our immediate conclusion, by the way, not just our conclusion, in the case of Minneapolis and Louisville, Federal judges to which these were presented had some tough questions. And in the case of Louisville, the judge asked the DOJ lawyers, these DOJ lawyers I've described from the Civil Rights Division, to explain themselves. How did you reach that conclusion?

And our immediate conclusion, by the way, not just our conclusion, in the case of Minneapolis and Louisville, Federal judges to which these were presented had some tough questions. And in the case of Louisville, the judge asked the DOJ lawyers, these DOJ lawyers I've described from the Civil Rights Division, to explain themselves. How did you reach that conclusion?

And our immediate conclusion, by the way, not just our conclusion, in the case of Minneapolis and Louisville, Federal judges to which these were presented had some tough questions. And in the case of Louisville, the judge asked the DOJ lawyers, these DOJ lawyers I've described from the Civil Rights Division, to explain themselves. How did you reach that conclusion?

What are the data supporting your conclusion? How do you account for variables like... What are the high crime areas? I mean, are the high crime areas racially different than the population of the city? These lawyers did not have answers. It was embarrassing. And so the judge refused to enter the consent decree in Louisville and sent the DOJ back and said, I need your answers. Guess what?

What are the data supporting your conclusion? How do you account for variables like... What are the high crime areas? I mean, are the high crime areas racially different than the population of the city? These lawyers did not have answers. It was embarrassing. And so the judge refused to enter the consent decree in Louisville and sent the DOJ back and said, I need your answers. Guess what?

What are the data supporting your conclusion? How do you account for variables like... What are the high crime areas? I mean, are the high crime areas racially different than the population of the city? These lawyers did not have answers. It was embarrassing. And so the judge refused to enter the consent decree in Louisville and sent the DOJ back and said, I need your answers. Guess what?

This is days before the administration is about to turn over. So we've asked for a couple of continuances. So...

This is days before the administration is about to turn over. So we've asked for a couple of continuances. So...

This is days before the administration is about to turn over. So we've asked for a couple of continuances. So...

You should have to prove it. But as I said, no jury has ever agreed with the DOJ. But what are the measures?

You should have to prove it. But as I said, no jury has ever agreed with the DOJ. But what are the measures?

You should have to prove it. But as I said, no jury has ever agreed with the DOJ. But what are the measures?

Well, so we have, of course, being the government, we have statisticians on our staff at the Department of Justice. I was surprised to show up. I was thinking, oh my gosh, let me look at all these lawyers. What is their trial experience? Oh, there's a PhD in statistics here. That's going to be really useful in court. But they could be, by the way. There are cases.

Well, so we have, of course, being the government, we have statisticians on our staff at the Department of Justice. I was surprised to show up. I was thinking, oh my gosh, let me look at all these lawyers. What is their trial experience? Oh, there's a PhD in statistics here. That's going to be really useful in court. But they could be, by the way. There are cases.

Well, so we have, of course, being the government, we have statisticians on our staff at the Department of Justice. I was surprised to show up. I was thinking, oh my gosh, let me look at all these lawyers. What is their trial experience? Oh, there's a PhD in statistics here. That's going to be really useful in court. But they could be, by the way. There are cases.