The Sacramento County Sheriff announced Tuesday that deputies will no longer respond to mental health calls unless a crime is being committed.
Sheriff Jim Cooper cited a 2024 ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as the reason for the policy change.
The court found a Las Vegas police officer liable for the death of a man in mental distress after using force, despite the man not being a crime suspect.
Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office Press Release Re: Mental Health Calls
In July 2024, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a significant ruling in Scott v. Smith, which has major implications for law enforcement’s involvement in non-criminal mental health crises. The case centered on an individual experiencing mental distress who called law enforcement for assistance. Upon arrival, officers used force to restrain him but did so in the absence of any criminal activity. Tragically, Scott lost consciousness during the encounter and was later pronounced dead. The court highlighted that the officers’ use of force was excessive and violated Scott’s Fourth Amendment rights, as the officers were responding to a non-criminal complaint, negating the reason to have responded to the call in the first place.
Traditionally, police officers have been the default responders to such situations, serving as a “catch-all,” even when no crime has occurred. However, incidents like Scott’s highlight the potential for escalation simply by showing up with a badge and gun. Law enforcement officers are not professional mental health clinicians and can no longer be the primary responders in these situations.
In response to this court decision, I had to reevaluate our protocols. Deputies will no longer respond to mental health calls where no crime is being committed. Instead, these situations are now handled by mental health professionals better equipped to manage such crises, beginning with Sacramento County’s Community Wellness Response Team (CWRT) and further utilizing and publicizing 988.
The Scott v. Smith ruling serves as a call for change, prompting law enforcement agencies to reconsider their role in non-criminal mental health crises. We cannot even transport anyone needing mental health services who does not want to go voluntarily, which rarely ever happens. This shift reflects a broader recognition of the need for specialized responses to mental health emergencies. By limiting police involvement and empowering mental health professionals to take the lead, communities can work towards more compassionate and effective responses, ultimately enhancing public safety and trust.
This is not about drawing a line in the sand or calling out a bluff. Being mentally ill is not a crime. If no crime is occurring, law enforcement simply shouldn’t be there. This policy change is rooted in two main factors:
1. I am making our agency compliant with the court ruling.
2. We want those suffering from a mental health crisis to receive the best possible services to achieve the best possible outcomes.
And law enforcement is not the answer.