Cops blow up an innocent bystander’s business, and the courts shrug
Never ones to miss an opportunity for an excessive demonstration of force, the LAPD destroyed a business and failed to get their man.
Los Angeles Police blew up an innocent man’s business during a standoff he had nothing to do with, and when he asked to be compensated for the damage, a court explained that actually, no, he gets nothing. According to Reason, the destruction was legally permissible, the loss was unfortunate, and the bill is his problem. Congratulations to everyone involved! The system is working exactly as designed.
In August of 2022, an armed fugitive threw Carlos Pena out of his North Hollywood printing shop and barricaded himself inside it. Over the course of 13 hours, a SWAT team with the LAPD launched more than 30 rounds of tear gas canisters through the walls, door, roof, and windows. After the standoff, police discovered the suspect had managed to escape. But Pena was left with a husk of what his store once was, the inside ravaged and equipment ruined, saddling him with over $60,000 in damages, according to his lawsuit against the city of Los Angeles.
It’s a suit Pena did not want to file, having repeatedly reached out to the government to recoup his losses before going to court. The city ignored him. Pena, meanwhile, was hemorrhaging income, resigned to working out of his garage at a much-reduced capacity with a single printer he purchased after the raid.
The recent ruling on Pena’s claim joins a burgeoning pile of case law wading through this exact scenario. Each decision ultimately grapples with a version of a core question: Does the Takings Clause cease to apply in some sense when property is destroyed via “police power”?
The case revolves around a familiar bit of legal sleight of hand. When the government takes or damages property for public use, that is supposed to require compensation. But when police do it in the name of law enforcement, even if the owner is innocent and the damage is catastrophic, courts often decide it does not count. In this case, officers caused more than $60,000 in damage to a business owned by someone who committed no crime, and a court ruled that the Constitution offers him no remedy.
Defenders of the ruling (police unions) will insist that letting property owners recover damages would somehow tie the cops’ hands and thus end civilization. In reality, what this does is shift the cost of aggressive policing from the state onto random civilians who happen to be nearby. Police violence is socialized, but Police damage is privatized. If your livelihood is vaporized in the process, that is apparently a price the law is perfectly comfortable making you pay. After all, they protect and serve.