Nationwide — Jesmond O. Riggins, a member of the Baltimore City Police Accountability Board (PAB), has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore and three city officials, challenging his removal from the Administrative Charging Committee (ACC) and raising broader concerns about the independence of Baltimore’s police oversight system.
The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, alleges that Riggins was unlawfully removed from a fixed-term, statutorily protected position in violation of his First Amendment and due process rights.
According to the complaint, Riggins had been appointed to the ACC—a body responsible for reviewing police misconduct investigations and determining whether officers should face administrative charges—after being designated by the PAB Chair, sworn in by the Mayor, and completing a required 40-hour state-mandated training. His term was set to run through May 30, 2026.
On November 4, 2025, Riggins testified before the Baltimore City Council’s Public Safety Committee, raising concerns about the independence of the City’s police oversight system and warning that legal interpretations advanced by the Law Department could undermine its authority.
According to the complaint, Riggins was told immediately after his testimony that he was “in trouble.” Ten days later, on November 14, 2025, he was removed from the ACC by PAB Chair Jamal Turner.
The lawsuit alleges that the removal occurred without notice, without cause, without a hearing, and without action by the Mayor—despite a City law requiring that ACC members may be removed only by the Mayor and only for cause.
Instead, the defendants relied on a legal interpretation issued by the Baltimore City Law Department that characterized the ACC seat associated with the PAB Chair as an “ex officio” position that could be reassigned at will, rather than a fixed-term appointment subject to removal only for cause. The complaint alleges that this interpretation conflicts with the City Code and effectively nullifies statutory protections governing police oversight officials.
“This case is about whether the law governing police oversight in Baltimore actually means what it says,” Riggins said. “I was removed from a sworn, trained, and compensated position without process and without authority. If that stands, then the independence of civilian oversight is at risk.”
The complaint also details communications that occurred prior to Riggins’s removal, including statements to a media outlet indicating that he would be replaced before any formal action had taken place. A fellow Board member later described the explanation for those statements as “disingenuous” during a public meeting.
Riggins is not seeking reinstatement, as his original term is set to expire in May 2026. Instead, he seeks declaratory and injunctive relief clarifying the law and preventing future removals that do not comply with statutory requirements, as well as damages for the violations alleged.
The lawsuit asserts claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for First Amendment retaliation and deprivation of due process, as well as violations of the Maryland Declaration of Rights.
“This is not just about one position,” Riggins added. “It is about whether oversight bodies can function independently, or whether they can be reshaped at will when their members speak out.”
For press inquiries, contact Jesmond O. Riggins at 443-865-4786/ jesmondr@gmail.com