By Chief (ret.) Tom Weitzel
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to follow and signup for notifications!
A troubling trend has infiltrated American law enforcement: political interference that undermines police leadership and jeopardizes officer safety. While many exceptional police chiefs, superintendents and sheriffs across the country serve their communities with honor, a growing threat cannot be ignored.
Even here in the Chicago metro area, we are fortunate to have outstanding police leadership. The Chicago Police Department has a capable superintendent, and many suburban departments in Cook County and neighboring counties are led by professionals committed to public safety. But leadership today must do more than manage operations — it must resist inappropriate political pressure from mayors, village presidents and city managers who seek to control police departments for ideological gain.
| RELATED: Border Patrol shooting: Suspect had previously doxxed officers, DHS alleges Chicago PD did not respond
Since the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, political influence has increasingly targeted police leadership. One of the most dangerous examples is the directive — often issued behind closed doors — not to assist ICE agents when they are under attack.
Let me be clear: ICE agents are federal law enforcement officers. When they are injured in the line of duty and call for help, it is unconscionable for local police to be ordered not to respond. This is not just a breach of professional conduct — it is a betrayal of the core law enforcement principle that we assist fellow officers in need. Tragically, such refusals have already led to preventable injuries and deaths.
In Chicago, ICE agents involved in a collision while apprehending a suspect were falsely accused of misconduct after viral photos distorted the truth. The media ran with the narrative without fact-checking, and the Chicago Police Department reportedly sent a commander to ensure officers followed the directive not to assist.
Such incidents are part of a broader problem that extends beyond any single agency.
The rise of politicized policing
One of the most corrosive trends in modern policing is the appointment of law enforcement leaders based on political loyalty rather than experience or merit. When chiefs and sheriffs are selected to serve political agendas instead of public safety, the consequences are immediate and damaging.
Political pressure often interferes with the independence of investigations, especially in high-profile cases. It’s not uncommon to see elected officials conducting press briefings about major arrests or incidents — briefings that should be led by the chief or sheriff. These appearances are rarely about informing the public; they’re about optics, reelection and political gain.
This practice not only sidelines professional policing — it erodes public trust. When law enforcement is seen as an extension of political machinery, communities begin to question the motives behind every decision, every arrest and every policy. That’s a dangerous place to be.
Police leaders must reclaim their voice. They must insist on operational independence and resist being used as props in political theater. The badge is not a campaign tool — it’s a public trust.
It is official misconduct to order officers to ignore fellow law enforcement agents in distress. Chiefs must have the courage to defy such orders. Patrol officers and detectives are often caught in a political crossfire, but police leadership bears responsibility. If we allow this to continue, it will cost lives.
Policing must remain rooted in service, not politics. The badge is not red or blue — it’s gold. And it must never be for sale.
What police leaders can do to keep politics out of policing
In today’s hyper-partisan climate, the line between governance and interference is blurring — and that should alarm every police leader in America.
Policing is not a political tool. It is a public service grounded in constitutional authority, community trust and professional standards. Yet too often, law enforcement decisions are shaped not by data or operational need but by political pressure, media optics or campaign agendas. That’s not just dangerous — it’s unsustainable.
So what can police leaders do?
Draw the line — publicly and internally. Chiefs and sheriffs must clearly define the boundary between political oversight and operational independence. Elected officials have a role in budgets and policy priorities, but they should never dictate tactical decisions — such as who gets arrested, what charges are filed or how officers are deployed. When that line is crossed, leaders must speak up, even when it’s uncomfortable.
Refuse to be a prop. Law enforcement leaders should not appear at campaign rallies, endorse candidates or allow their departments to be used as political backdrops. Wearing the badge means serving all people, not just those in power. Neutrality is not weakness — it’s integrity.
Make data the driver. Decisions about crime trends, resource allocation and community engagement should be based on data — not headlines or polling. Every agency should have a full-time data analyst. When you lead with facts, you leave less room for political spin.
Train for ethical courage. Leadership training must include how to navigate political pressure. Officers and command staff need tools to recognize when influence becomes interference — and the courage to push back. Silence is complicity.
Engage the public before politicians do. Build trust directly with your community. Hold town halls, publish use-of-force data and explain your policies. When the public hears from you first, political narratives lose their grip.
Support oversight — with guardrails. Civilian oversight can enhance transparency, but it must respect operational boundaries. Review is not command. Police leaders should help shape these boards, not resist them.
Final thought
Policing must remain rooted in service, not politics. That requires courage, clarity and a commitment to principle over popularity. The badge is not red or blue — it’s gold. And it must never be for sale.
Tactical takeaway
Operational independence is a cornerstone of public trust. Police leaders who define clear boundaries between political oversight and professional decision-making protect both their officers and their communities.
How can police agencies safeguard operational independence when political pressure challenges decisions? Share below.
About the author
Tom Weitzel is the retired chief of police of Riverside, Illinois, where he served for 37 years, including 13 as chief. A survivor of a line-of-duty shooting early in his career, he has become a national advocate for officer safety, responsible media coverage and legislative reform. Chief Weitzel serves as an ambassador for the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund and frequently contributes columns and op-eds on policing, leadership and public safety. He can be reached at @chiefweitzel and TikTok @chiefweitzel.
