George Gascón Attorney
https://mynewsla.com/los-angeles-district-attorn https://nathanhochman.com/
ey-George-Gascón/
LOS ANGELES — The debate over criminal justice reform in Los Angeles has taken a decisive turn following the November 5th, 2024 election. Nathan Hochman, a former United States (U.S.) Attorney, defeated incumbent District Attorney (D.A.) George Gascón, signaling a significant shift toward a more traditional, “tough-on-crime” approach.
“The voters of Los Angeles County have spoken,” Hochman declared in a post on social media after the election, “Enough is enough of D.A. Gascón’s pro-criminal extreme policies; they look forward to a safer future.” Hochman’s election then marks a pivotal moment for Los Angeles, where the balance between reform and public safety has long been a source of tension. Now, it’s Hochman’s turn to take the pen and begin writing new pages in Los Angeles’ criminal justice chapter.
For the past four years, Gascón championed a reform-oriented agenda, including eliminating cash bail for nonviolent offenses, reducing sentencing enhancements and emphasizing alternatives to incarceration. Gascón defended these policies throughout his campaign, stating, “We need a system that is about more than punishment; we need a system that holistically addresses root causes of crime and aims to make our county both fair and safe.”
George Gascón has argued that the cash bail system disproportionately impacts low-income individuals, especially those from marginalized communities. Under this system, individuals who cannot afford bail remain incarcerated pretrial, even for minor offenses, while wealthier individuals are released. Gascón claims this practice does not enhance public safety and exacerbates social inequality, stating, “Money bail is as unjust as it is unsafe. It allows wealthy people who are dangerous to purchase their freedom while those without means who pose no risk to public safety languish in jail awaiting trial”. Additionally, studies from the National Institute of Justice (2021) support the argument that pretrial detention can increase the likelihood of a guilty plea. As a result, Gascón has sought to eliminate cash bail for nonviolent offenders in Los Angeles County in favor of risk-based assessments.
In his term, Gascón has advocated for the elimination of sentencing enhancements (additional prison time added to a sentence) for factors like repeat offenses and gang affiliations, arguing that these laws contribute to excessively long prison sentences that fail to reduce reoffending. Many individuals, particularly from minority communities, are subjected to longer sentences due to prior convictions or alleged gang ties, even for nonviolent crimes. These enhancements, such as California’s three-strikes law (mandates life sentences for individuals convicted of three or more serious crimes), have been criticized for disproportionately impacting people of color and overcrowding prisons.
Furthermore, research has shown that long prison sentences do not effectively prevent criminals from repeating offenses and that rehabilitative programs are more successful in preventing reoffending. The ACLU has pointed out the harm caused by these sentencing enhancements, which often result in unfair punishment that fails to improve public safety. Gascón’s push to eliminate sentencing enhancements thus reflects a growing recognition that such policies undermine justice and fail to make communities safer.
With that in mind, Gascón has clearly emphasized the need for alternatives to incarceration, such as rehabilitation and diversion programs to reduce prison populations and enhance long-term public safety. Rather than incarcerating individuals for minor offenses, he prioritizes programs that address root causes like mental health issues, substance abuse, and lack of education or employment. Studies, including those from the International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, show that diversion programs targeting mental health issues significantly reduce the likelihood of reoffending. Furthermore, restorative justice initiatives, which aim to repair harm through dialogue between victims and offenders, are gaining recognition for their ability to foster accountability while reducing repeated offenses. This approach has gained support from figures like George Gascón, who deem it as a more effective and humane alternative to systems that focus solely on punishment.
However, critics like Hochman and many of Gascón’s opponents have argued that “crime has increased every year that George Gascón has been in office”, with auto thefts rising by 3.9% and car break-ins increasing by 3.7%. They contend, “It’s time for a District Attorney who will prioritize public safety and hold criminals accountable.”
So, what can Los Angeles residents expect under Hochman’s leadership?
Hochman has introduced his “Blueprint for Justice,” which marks a significant shift in Los Angeles’s criminal justice policies. He is committed to reversing several progressive reforms enacted by his predecessor, George Gascón, focusing on reinstating sentence enhancements, prioritizing public safety and reinvesting in law enforcement.
Over the next four years, Hochman aims to restore sentencing enhancements for crimes involving gangs, repeat offenders and the use of weapons in violent offenses. He argues that removing such measures has resulted in leniency toward criminals, enabling repeat offenders to avoid appropriate punishment. To address this, Hochman plans to instruct his office to reapply these enhancements in relevant cases, ensuring that gang-related crimes and those involving firearms receive the proper sentences. Additionally, he has expressed his intention to advocate for legislative changes at the state level to reinstate or strengthen these enhancements if necessary. Supporting this perspective, a 2002 study by Joanna M. Shepherd found that California’s Three Strikes law, which imposed harsher sentences on repeat offenders, was associated with significantly reducing serious felony crimes, suggesting that such sentencing enhancements can serve as effective deterrents. Hochman concurs with this view and believes these policies are crucial for keeping repeat offenders off the streets and deterring future criminal activity.
Besides this, Nathan Hochman has outlined several measures to enhance public safety in Los Angeles. One of his primary goals is to restore prosecutorial discretion, to assess each case individually instead of adhering to mandatory policies. This flexibility would enable prosecutors to consider factors such as the severity of the offense, the defendant’s history and any potential for rehabilitation before deciding on the appropriate course of action. Hochman also plans to address low-level nonviolent crimes, particularly those linked to homelessness, by ensuring that offenses like criminal threats (intimidating or threatening harm) and trespassing (unauthorized entry onto private property) are prosecuted. By holding individuals accountable for these offenses, he aims to prevent these issues from escalating into more serious crimes, which could further strain public safety. Furthermore, Hochman is committed to supporting victims’ families by ensuring their voices are heard during the parole process. He intends to have prosecutors attend parole hearings and actively advocate against the early release of convicted criminals, making sure that the impact on victims and their families is considered in parole decisions.
Nathan Hochman is also committed to strengthening Los Angeles law enforcement through resource allocation and policy reform, stating, “We need to untie the hands of law enforcement so they can do their jobs and keep our communities safe.” He plans to increase funding for training programs emphasizing de-escalation, community policing and strategies for tackling violent crime. Hochman also aims to hire more prosecutors to support law enforcement investigations and ensure that police have the necessary resources to act swiftly in response to criminal activity. In addition, he intends to push for state-level reforms that would lift restrictions on police actions, such as limitations on searches and seizures, to enhance their ability to respond to crime effectively. Supporting this approach, a 2024 discussion featuring economist Jennifer Doleac highlighted that increasing police presence could reduce violent crime, allowing for the potential effectiveness of Hochman’s blueprint.
With Nathan Hochman stepping into office, Los Angeles faces the turning of a new page in its criminal justice story. With his promises to reinstate strict policies and invest in law enforcement, the city may either begin a chapter of renewed safety or revisit old challenges. The coming years will determine whether Hochman’s vision for justice can truly rewrite the city’s future—or if the narrative will be rewritten once again.
