In recent years, some states have considered reassessing or even repealing aspects of their POBR legislation. Heightened public concern over police misconduct—amplified by media coverage of high-profile incidents—has led legislators to question whether the existing legal frameworks remain fit for purpose. For instance, following public protests and calls for reform, states that had historically adhered closely to POBR models began contemplating modifications aimed at increasing transparency. Proposals include reducing the waiting periods before investigators can interview officers, broadening access to disciplinary records, and allowing for swifter suspensions or terminations in cases of egregious misconduct (Walker, 2019; ACLU, 2020).
Maryland, in particular, has revisited its original LEOBR. After decades of serving as a template for other states, Maryland lawmakers, responding to public pressure, enacted significant changes to their policing statutes in recent years. Although not a wholesale abandonment of POBR principles, these reforms illustrate how shifting social and political attitudes can prompt legislatures to recalibrate the delicate balance between procedural safeguards for officers and demands for public accountability.