GoVia Highlight A Hero: Community Safety, Transparency and Trust
The GoVia Highlight A Hero app is a new community-policing platform aimed at young people (ages 14–26) that combines real-time support with accountability tools. Users can open the app during a police encounter to instantly video-call an attorney or a mental-health counselor, potentially slowing and de-escalating tense interactions. At the same time, GoVia encourages “verified, respectful” feedback on each encounter. In practice this means a user fills out a brief report similar to a mini police report—about the officer, the context, and any use-of-force or misconduct. These reports become part of a “bank of reviews” that can be seen by other citizens and integrated into official officer records or civilian-review boards. By aggregating data on stops, use-of-force incidents, shootings, or training gaps, GoVia can help identify trends and suggest where policy or training improvements are needed.
GoVia’s founders describe it as “for both parties” supporting civilians and police. As founder Georgio Sabino III puts it, the app “empowers individuals during police encounters by providing real-time access to attorneys and mental health crisis professionals,” while also celebrating exemplary officers as “heroes”. Sabino envisions GoVia giving “privilege and credibility to all people – Black, brown, white, poor, any folks who don’t have the funds to have an attorney” during a stop. Business partner Nafisah Alim, a Cleveland mental-health advocate, adds that GoVia is about having “someone there to help you get through your interaction with an officer safely” (whether that’s a lawyer, counselor, or guide). In short, the app uses common smartphone tech (video chat, chatbots, AI-driven data analysis, etc.) to build transparency and trust from the ground up.
Deactivating the Federal Misconduct Database
On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order rescinding President Biden’s 2022 Order 14074 (“Advancing Effective, Accountable Policing and Criminal Justice Practices”) and shutting down the National Law Enforcement Accountability Database (NLEAD) congress.gov. NLEAD had been created to serve as a centralized DOJ repository of federal officer misconduct and commendations, launched December 2023 after Section 5 of EO 14074 directed the Attorney General to establish it congress.gov. With Trump’s revocation, the Justice Department announced NLEAD “is no longer active” – agencies “can no longer query or add data” – and that it is being decommissioned immediately bjs.ojp.gov cbsnews.com. In practice, the NLEAD website now returns an error and the federal database is defunct cbsnews.com.
Critics warn that this rollback creates a transparency gap. As the Criminal Defense Bar put it, “a national database is an essential step towards transparency for the entire country,” and without it “federal officers will continue to abuse with impunity” nacdl.org. The NLEAD had allowed federal agencies to privately check if an officer had a history of serious misconduct (excessive force, civil rights violations, etc.) before hiring or promotion cbsnews.com. It was specifically designed to prevent “wandering officers” – those fired for misconduct who simply move to another agency unaware of their past abuse cbsnews.com. With NLEAD gone, defenders and reformers say agencies lose a key safeguard for vetting hires and for annual review of officers’ force records. (The Biden administration had emphasized the database would keep available a record of convictions, decertification’s, terminations, and sustained complaints for federal law-enforcement officers going back seven years washingtonpost.com, a promise now abandoned.)
The Trump order did not dismantle the National Decertification Index (NDI) – a separate registry managed by the International Association of Directors of Law Enforcement Standards (IADLEST) congress.gov. The NDI collects certificate or license revocations issued by state agencies for misconduct, but its scope is limited. As IADLEST notes, the NDI is simply “a national registry of certificate or license revocation actions relating to officer misconduct,” with records contributed by participating states iadlest.org. Crucially, inclusion in the NDI does not automatically bar someone from being hired or reappointed, and the data must be verified with each state before use iadlest.org. In practice, only 50 state agencies report decertification, and other misconduct (non-termination complaints, use-of-force reports, training issues, etc.) are not included. Thus the NDI continues to operate, but it cannot serve as a comprehensive misconduct ledger for all officers. The loss of NLEAD removes the federal piece of that accountability puzzle, leaving only patchwork state records.
Deregulation and Policing Accountability
Compounding concerns over transparency, the new Trump administration has issued a broader “overcriminalization” order for federal regulations (May 9, 2025) that discourages prosecution of regulatory offenses unless there is clear intent to harm whitehouse.gov. The order directs agencies to post all criminal offenses in the federal regulations, and generally forbids pursuing strict-liability cases where someone may unknowingly violate a rule whitehouse.gov. In effect, the directive “prioritizes prosecutions only for those who knowingly violate regulations and cause significant harm” whitehouse.gov, and warns that enforcement of unposted or obscure rules is discouraged. While aimed at business and administrative rules, advocates note this approach could bleed into law enforcement practice. Raising the bar for proving “intent” might, for example, make it harder to hold officers accountable for regulatory or training violations that lack obvious malice. Critics argue that, taken together with NLEAD’s shutdown, the administration’s deregulatory tilt signals a general easing of consequences for bureaucratic misconduct nacdl.org washingtonpost.com. Law-and-order proponents counter that enforcement should focus on “bad actors” who intentionally harm, but community leaders warn that neglecting lesser offenses could reduce oversight of police departments’ internal rules and training standards.
Filling the Gap: State and Community Reporting
In the vacuum left by NLEAD’s decommissioning, local and tech-driven efforts will be critical. GoVia is designed to help fill that gap by crowd-sourcing encounter data at the state and local level. Every time a young user rates a police interaction in the app, the information (describing context, officer badge number, conduct, and outcome) becomes part of GoVia’s database. Over time this builds a searchable record of officer performance – including use-of-force incidents, complaints or commendations – drawn directly from citizen experiences. The app’s analytics can flag hotspots or recurring issues, since “the app’s data collection can help identify trends and areas for improvement within the force, leading to more effective training and policy adjustments.” In states that partner with GoVia, these citizen-submitted records could be shared with civilian oversight commissions or included in annual departmental reviews.
Civil-rights advocates stress that this bottom-up transparency is sorely needed. As NACDL President Christopher Wellborn warns, “without a central, accessible record of police misconduct, federal officers will continue to abuse with impunity” nacdl.org. GoVia’s approach – channeling reports and ratings from the public – aims to create that “central record” at a community scale. By integrating data like use-of-force counts and training outcomes (for example, noting how often officers resort to force in traffic stops, or the results of de-escalation drills) into annual reviews, GoVia offers municipalities a de facto alternative to a federal database. Even if federal oversight is scaled back, local data-sharing agreements and transparency partnerships (with advocacy groups or news organizations) could preserve scrutiny of officers’ histories. In short, citizen engagement tools like GoVia can keep accountability alive when top-down systems falter.
Perspectives on Accountability
Civil-Rights Advocates
Critics of the NLEAD shutdown argue that only robust data can curb police abuses. “A national database is an essential step toward transparency for the entire country,” said NACDL president Christopher Wellborn, who noted that unchecked misconduct would otherwise continue. He condemned the executive order for removing “this critical initiative” and warned it will “harm communities, decrease public safety [and] erode public confidence in law enforcement” nacdl.org. Similarly, advocacy groups emphasize that comprehensive records (not just select decertification) are needed to spot patterns of bias or excessive force. As NACDL Executive Director Lisa Wayne put it, by deleting the database the administration has effectively “given a nod of approval to police misconduct within our law enforcement ranks” nacdl.org. Civil-rights leaders see tools like GoVia as lifelines for their goals: they can serve as an independent record built by citizens, ensuring that records of stop-and-frisk abuse, wrongful shootings or training deficiencies remain visible.
Law Enforcement Professionals
Some police groups support controlled transparency but emphasize due process. The National Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), representing many local and federal officers, said it worked with federal officials on NLEAD. FOP Executive Director Jim Pasco explained that as long as “whatever negative information is in [the database]…is fully adjudicated and they have due process and all their appeals have been exhausted,” unions support maintaining records washingtonpost.com. “We feel the way it is written should protect people’s rights,” Pasco said washingtonpost.com. In other words, many officers want misconduct data shared – but only after investigations and internal appeals are complete. From this view, GoVia’s emphasis on verified, post-encounter reports and on positive feedback as well as complaints may be reassuring officers who behave properly get public praise, and those under investigation are not prematurely “tried in the court of public opinion.” Police leaders also highlight resource concerns: smaller departments worry that any new data-sharing mandate will need funding for investigators and IT. Some have criticized federal oversight as unfunded or interfering with local control. Thus law-enforcement perspectives on tools like GoVia are mixed – supportive of transparency in principle, but cautious about accuracy, privacy and workload.
Community Leaders and Users
Local community advocates and app testers argue that citizen engagement is essential. Nafisah Alim, who helped develop GoVia as a mental-health professional, says the app’s value is giving ordinary people “someone there to help you get through your interaction with an officer safely.” She points out that most people lack access to lawyers or training on how to talk to police. GoVia aims to democratize that support. Community organizers have praised such tools for empowering vulnerable groups. In Cleveland and elsewhere, residents and activists note that technologies which let them document and share experiences (video, ratings, GPS-verified reports) can shift power by making law enforcement more answerable to the public. For example, Sabino asked rhetorically, “Imagine if Eric Garner had his phone in his hand and said ‘Hey, GoVia,’ and now an attorney pops up. What if George Floyd had that?”. Even if app founders are speaking metaphorically, their point resonates: community members see GoVia as a way to ensure police encounters are monitored – potentially deterring violence and providing evidence if things go wrong. In early user trials on a university campus, students have responded positively, saying it makes them feel “safer and more supported” when interacting with officers. Local nonprofits and faith groups have also signaled willingness to publicize and help teach GoVia, seeing it as a practical step toward the transparency younger generations demand.
GoVia’s Take
GoVia Highlight A Hero represents an innovative response to a shifting accountability landscape. With the NLEAD database now offline, and national oversight approaches changing, state and community tools become all the more important. By crowdsourcing data on uses of force, officer conduct, and even day-to-day procedural interactions, GoVia seeks to keep transparency alive at the grassroots. Civil-rights advocates argue that, without comprehensive public records, abuses will go unchecked nacdl.org. Law enforcement leaders maintain that any database must respect due process washingtonpost.com. In this context, GoVia’s model – real-time legal/mental-health access plus post-encounter reporting – aims to balance those concerns. As one community volunteer put it, citizen engagement apps are essential “partners” in policing reform: they give ordinary people a voice in how police are evaluated and trained. Whether GoVia and similar platforms can ultimately fill the gap left by federal decommissioning of NLEAD remains to be seen. But in the meantime, they offer a new channel for building trust (and accountability) one honest encounter — positive or negative — at a time.
Sources: Official DOJ and White House statements on NLEAD and deregulation congress.gov whitehouse.gov; news reports and advocacy group releases on the database shutdown cbsnews.com nacdl.org; information from IADLEST on the National Decertification Index iadlest.org; GoVia app documentation and interviews; law enforcement unions and civil-rights defenders washingtonpost.com nacdl.org
