During the same period, the number of Black Californians killed by homicide fell from 690 to 372—a reduction of 318 victims, or 46 percent. Among Black men, the demographic group at greatest risk of homicide victimization, the number fell from 613 to 310, a decline of 303 victims, or nearly 50 percent. Over four years, California recorded 718 fewer Black homicide victims than if the 2021 level had continued.
If California is serious about racial equity, why wasn’t that the headline?
For much of the past decade, California has measured racial equity largely through police stops, searches, arrests, prosecutions, incarceration and other points of contact with the criminal justice system. Those questions matter. Government should exercise its authority fairly, lawfully and without discrimination.
But they are only half the equation.
California has become very good at measuring how government exercises its power. It has devoted far less attention to measuring how effectively government protects people from violence.
No racial disparity in California’s criminal justice system has been more persistent—or more devastating—than the disparity in homicide victimization. Black Californians have long suffered a vastly disproportionate share of the state’s homicides. A 46 percent reduction in Black homicide victims therefore represents more than an encouraging crime statistic.
It is one of California law-enforcements most meaningful racial-equity achievements.
The contrast with California’s Racial and Identity Profiling Act reporting is striking. RIPA has created one of the nation’s most comprehensive datasets on police-citizen encounters, documenting millions of stops and identifying racial disparities in police contacts and that deserves attention, however, it does not determine why those disparities exist.
It identifies patterns without establishing whether they result from unlawful bias, deployment strategies, crime patterns, calls for service, suspect descriptions or other factors. A disparity should prompt inquiry, not end it. And, RIPA fails utterly to address the racial or ethnic composition of police agencies – instead treating them like a separate unique demographic. Thus, it fails to address the central premise of racial profiling. Racism.
The homicide report measures something different: results.
Its most important finding is not simply that homicides declined statewide, but that the greatest improvement occurred within the community that has historically suffered the greatest burden of lethal violence.
The rising homicide clearance rate is also significant.
From 2021 to 2025, it increased from 54.5 percent to 79.3 percent, a gain of 24.8 percentage points. Higher homicide clearance rates are among the clearest indicators of effective policing. They reflect the ability of investigators to identify offenders, locate and earn the cooperation of witnesses, collect and corroborate evidence, and build cases that can withstand scrutiny.
That work demands public trust.
When nearly four out of five homicides are cleared rather than barely half, police are not merely recording safer conditions. They are helping to create them.
The report also shows that this policing success did not come at the cost of increased lethal force. Peace-officer justifiable homicides declined from 77 to 41, a reduction of 36 deaths, or nearly 47 percent. Those involving Black Californians fell from 27 to eight—a decline of 19 deaths, or more than 70 percent.
California subjects police to extensive scrutiny through RIPA, body-worn cameras, civilian oversight, prosecutors, courts and the news media. That accountability is necessary, but it should cut both ways. If police are expected to answer for misconduct, rising violence and unsolved murders, they should also receive appropriate credit when homicides fall, police use of deadly force declines and substantially more killers are identified.
These improvements occurred during a significant shift in California’s public-safety debate. Voters recalled San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin, removed Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price and declined to re-elect Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón. All three represented high crime regions who emphasized equity through less enforcement, de-carceration, and de-criminalization; voters increasingly demanded equity through effective protection as well.
Californians also rejected the elimination of cash bail and later approved Proposition 36, reflecting renewed concern about accountability and public safety.
The homicide report cannot tell us precisely which policies, political decisions or policing strategies produced these outcomes. But communities do not become safer by accident, and a 42 percent statewide reduction in homicide—combined with a 46 percent decline among Black victims and sharply improved clearance rates—cannot be discussed seriously while treating the police as incidental to the result.
This is, above all, a victory for Black Californians: hundreds fewer lives lost, hundreds fewer families devastated and substantially more victims receiving justice. It is also a victory for effective policing and for the partnerships officers build within the communities they serve. California has spent years examining policing primarily through disparities in enforcement. Its latest homicide report offers an opportunity to recognize the other side of racial equity—the protection of those who have historically borne the greatest burden of violence—and to acknowledge the police officers whose work helped make that protection real.
Steve Smith is a Senior Fellow in Urban Studies at the Pacific Research Institute, focusing on California’s ongoing crime challenges.
