Politicised Police: The Crumbling Perception of ‘Neutral’ Law Enforcement

Increasingly, the police’s response to protests and activism seems less about upholding the law and more about picking favorites—some movements get a pat on the back, while others are greeted by officers in full riot gear, batons at the ready. As public trust in law enforcement takes a nosedive, many are left wondering: has policing quietly traded in its badge of neutrality for political expediency?

Recent studies have highlighted disparities in law enforcement's responses to protests across the political spectrum. Data from the U.S. Crisis Monitor claimed that police were approximately three times more likely to use force against left-wing protests compared to right-wing ones, with force applied in 4.7% of left-wing protests versus 1.4% of right-wing protests. However, a quick glance at the Princeton-backed project website reveals an obvious left-wing political slant. Truly non-partisan data is rare, especially from higher academia, where the ratio of liberal to conservative professors (at least at U.S. universities) is approximately six to one.

Can we trust data from a politically prejudiced academia? Perhaps not. Despite the murkiness of the data, what is clear is that the perception of law enforcement has turned sour—from either side of the political aisle.

The Right-Wing View: A Rigged System

Many on the right believe that law enforcement is but an arm of leftist political institutions, suppressing right-leaning protests while allowing left-wing activism to flourish. Two key examples reinforce this perception.

First, the 2022 Canadian Trucker protests—organised against COVID-19 mandates—were met by police which employed a heavy-handed approach. Authorities not only arrested hundreds of protesters but also froze bank accounts and blocked crowdfunding efforts, effectively crippling the movement financially. Similarly, in the aftermath of the January 6th protest challenging the 2020 U.S. presidential election results, law enforcement launched an unprecedented crackdown. Over 1,500 individuals were charged, more than 1,000 convicted, and at least 460 incarcerated—measures conservatives argue were far harsher than those taken against left-wing protesters in comparable situations.

Beyond these high-profile events, conservatives in Europe claim their governments enforce a “two-tiered” justice system, where right-wing groups—especially those critical of mass migration—face disproportionate scrutiny. A freedom of information request in the UK revealed that, of the 24 protests banned in the past 30 years, 21 (88%) were affiliated with right-wing causes. Even tech mogul Elon Musk has echoed these concerns, labeling British Prime Minister Keir Starmer “Two-Tier Keir” after a police crackdown on a right-wing protest in 2024. Musk and other conservative figures have also pointed to law enforcement’s failure to properly investigate Britain’s so-called “grooming gangs”—groups of largely immigrant-born men implicated in decades of sexual abuse scandals—as evidence of selective policing.

The Left-Wing View: Boots on the Ground Oppression

In contrast, left-wing activists highlight aggressive law enforcement responses to demonstrations against racial injustice, climate policies, and other left-leaning causes. For example, during the Summer 2020 Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests in Washington, D.C., more than 300 BLM protesters were arrested in a single day. Meanwhile, in the UK, at least 40 activists were serving prison sentences as of December 2024 for participating in protests related to climate change and the Gaza war. Left-wing critics claim such heavy-handed tactics are routine when law enforcement deals with progressive activism.

Research supports this argument, too. A study by the Thurgood Marshall Institute found that police were significantly more likely to make arrests and use force at racial justice protests compared to other demonstrations. Even after accounting for protestor behavior, crowd size, and city demographics, police were 40% more likely to arrest left-wing demonstrators and nearly four times as likely to deploy pepper spray, tear gas, rubber bullets, or flash bangs against them.

A Shattered Consensus

What happens when citizens no longer trust that law enforcement is impartial? Over time, these fractures undermine the rule of law and weaken democratic stability, as policing is no longer seen as a public service but as a tool of political control. A weakening trust in the justice system risks radicalisation of groups believing themselves to be the victims of selective enforcement and who increasingly see the state as an adversary rather than a neutral authority.

The fragile social contract between democratic Western nations and their citizens hangs in the balance—threatened by a justice system many view as more fit for a banana republic than first-world powers of the 21st century. If the citizenry's perception of their police does not improve, the relative power of law enforcement will wane and open the floodgates for organised, politically-motivated crime. By exchanging their neutrality for politics, police risk becoming the architects of their own downfall.

Statement

Policing in Western democracies is no longer seen as a neutral force but as a political weapon, wielded differently depending on the movement. Right-wing activists decry selective crackdowns, while left-wing demonstrators face aggressive suppression—each side convinced the system is rigged against them. As public trust in law enforcement crumbles, the very foundation of democracy is at risk. Without restoring true impartiality, police forces may find themselves powerless, undermined by a society that no longer views them as enforcers of justice but as pawns in an ideological battle.

Weekly