As California attorney general, Xavier Becerra resisted transparency, threatened legal action against journalists, ducked police reforms and declined to investigate the police killing of an unarmed Latino man.
I was writing a column about why he would have been a bad pick for United States attorney general when the news hit: President-elect Joe Biden had instead nominated Becerra for secretary of Health and Human Services.
Becerra and I were scheduled to talk for 20 minutes last Thursday, but we jousted for an hour. I made it clear that, given his record in California, a Biden decision to appoint him AG would essentially be a middle finger to the national movement for police reform.
Becerra, who was reportedly on the shortlist for Biden’s AG nominees, decried such criticism as unfair and forcefully defended his record.
“I’ve never gone out there and done a press conference and beat my chest,” Becerra said, depicting himself as a low-key champion of reform who did not seek publicity.
He didn’t get the AG spot. Still, with Becerra packing his bags for a different job in Washington, California must ponder his legacy as the state’s first Latino AG. And Gov. Gavin Newsom must now decide whether to appoint a replacement in the Becerra mold — or to pick someone bold.
Gov. Jerry Brown appointed Becerra to replace Kamala Harris. Like Harris, Becerra tended to sidestep tough decisions. Instead, he burnished his profile by filing serial lawsuits against the Trump administration.
Suing Trump was necessary, but also easy. It carried no political risk. All Becerra had to do to look like a Democratic hero was sign off on press releases. But he chose to be less visible on thorny issues like police accountability. In situations where his power could have made a difference, he often demurred — or picked the wrong side.
Take Senate Bill 1421. The 2018 bill requires law enforcement agencies to release the disciplinary records of officers involved in shootings, crimes or misconduct. State Senator Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, wrote the bill to be retroactive and apply to past records.
Before SB 1421 took effect, some police departments destroyed records to ensure they’d never get released. Others, like Sacramento County Sheriff Scott Jones, argued that it only applied to cases filed after 2018.
Becerra initially refused to release past records. The Sacramento Bee Editorial Board blasted his decision as “A calculated betrayal of both the public interest and the law.”
California judges eventually ruled that was SB 1421 was indeed retroactive. “Another court tells Xavier Becerra to follow the law,” wrote the Orange County Register Editorial Board.
Becerra told me he was trying to protect citizen privacy, not bad cops.
“Are you saying that we should be disclosing all these victims who may not even been part of the charging documents against this officer … that their Social Security numbers, their personal private life should be disclosed … simply because the officer is implicated?” he asked.
But this tortuous defense fails to explain why law enforcement agencies such as the California Highway Patrol accepted the law’s retroactivity while Becerra resisted.
Becerra showed his true colors again in April 2019. After journalists with the Investigative Reporting Project at UC Berkeley obtained a list including the names of officers who had been accused or convicted of crimes, Becerra demanded that the reporters destroy the information or face potential criminal liability.
The journalists, being journalists, responded with a series called “Criminal Cops.” It detailed how California police officers remain on the beat despite criminal convictions. One newspaper published a searchable database.
Becerra did not press charges against the reporters.
After national protests over the killing of George Floyd, Becerra vowed action on police reform. His posturing drew mockery from critics familiar with his record. The Mercury News editorial board blasted him for coddling cops and for fighting “fiercely to keep the public in the dark about abusive cops.” Another police reform advocate panned his proposal as “aligned with law enforcement interests and against the people.”
Becerra remained mostly invisible as the California State Legislature debated major policing reforms last summer. Many of them failed. He did, however, express opposition to Assembly Bill 1506. The bill by Assemblyman Kevin McCarty, D-Sacramento, requires the attorney general’s office to investigate fatal police shootings.
Becerra said he agreed with the bill’s intentions, just not with McCarty’s approach. Gov. Gavin Newsom eventually signed a revised version. Becerra said the final version contained changes he’d proposed.
“Kevin McCarty wasn’t calling for us to have any money to do this stuff, he just wanted me to take it all over,” Becerra said. “And so if you look, we’re ready to do it … we’re going to be ready to go. Once we start getting the money, we can hire up.”
The law will require state investigations of incidents like the fatal police shooting of Sean Monterrosa. A Vallejo police officer in an unmarked vehicle shot 22-year-old Monterrosa while he was apparently on his knees with his hands in the air.
Police in Vallejo, where some officers allegedly bend the tips of their badges to commemorate their civilian kills, stalled the release of video footage of Monterrosa’s killing. Solano County’s useless district attorney, Krishna Abrams, recused herself and called on Becerra to lead the investigation. He declined, forcing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to request an FBI inquiry.
Did Pelosi contact Becerra, her former deputy in Congress, before requesting a federal inquiry?
“No,” Becerra said.
Why not?
“You’d have to talk to Nancy Pelosi about that,” he said. “I’m not sure why she didn’t ask me.”
Becerra said he lacked the resources to investigate every police shooting. He blasted as “disingenous” my assertion that he had failed to prioritize the issue because it was a political minefield.
“I hope to write in your article, if you want to be fair, that … you support me pulling my officers and agents away from doing the work of collecting those weapons from dangerous people in order for me to do the investigations of officer-involved shootings,” Becerra said, claiming that such investigations would pull resources away from other projects.
Some of the dangerous people with weapons, however, are police officers who use them against unarmed civilians. Whatever the excuse, Becerra’s refusal to investigate the high-profile killing of Monterrosa added to his reputation for timidity in the face of police abuse.
“I was very disappointed that he was unwilling to engage the community,” said John Burris, a civil rights lawyer who said he has supported Becerra and who represents Monterrosa’s family. “His mere presence in the community would have said a lot about the separation of powers within the government … The people in the community would have some confidence that there was another branch of government that is prepared to look at, and oversee, the local DA or the police.”
Becerra wouldn’t investigate Monterrosa’s killing, but he agreed to lesser interventions. His office is investigating whether police destroyed evidence in the case. It’s also collaborating with Vallejo police on a review of their practices. After the death of Stephon Clark, Becerra conducted a similar review at the invitation of Sacramento police.
Many will remember Becerra for his anti-Trump lawsuits, but let’s not forget how California’s first Latino “top cop” tiptoed around police abuse and resisted transparency.
Will California’s next AG will have the courage to go after bad cops when necessary — and without their permission? Or will Newsom appoint another overly cautious rising star who sees the office as little more than a stepping stone?
Gil Duran is California Opinion Editor for The Sacramento Bee.
