Judge Steve Leifman spent three decades on the bench in Miami-Dade County. He did not set out to become one of the most referenced names in American mental health justice reform. He set out to fix a problem in front of him — and what he built has since drawn researchers, legislators, police chiefs, and advocates from across the country, all traveling to South Florida to study what is now called the Miami Model.
The foundation of that model is not a court. It is not a piece of legislation.
"It's a 40-hour training program that teaches law enforcement how to identify individuals in crisis, how to deescalate the situation, and where to take them once you successfully deescalate the situation — rather than arresting them." — Judge Steve Leifman
That program — Crisis Intervention Team training, or CIT — operates on a straightforward premise: the officer's role in a mental health call is not to impose order, but to restore safety. The distinction matters enormously in practice. Miami did not ask officers to stop responding to these calls. It trained them to respond differently — and it did so at scale.
"We now have the largest trained squad of CIT officers in the United States. We have over 9,500 officers trained. They do absolutely amazing work." — Judge Steve Leifman
What the Numbers Actually Say
Claims about program effectiveness are common in criminal justice reform. The results reframe what becomes possible when law enforcement and clinical response are aligned.
"The number of arrests in Dade County went from 118,000 a year to 53,000. Our jail audit went from 7,400 to 4,400. And our police shootings almost stopped." — Judge Steve Leifman
That final data point — the reduction in police shootings — opens a dimension of the Miami Model that is rarely part of the public conversation about mental health reform. It demands a candid look at what officers themselves are carrying into these calls.
"In between 15 and 35% of police officers have very severe PTSD. And you have to understand that last year, and the year before that, and the year before that — more police officers died from suicide than in the line of duty." — Judge Steve Leifman
In recognition of that reality, Miami built a confidential treatment program for officers outside their departments — a place where they could receive care without professional consequence. The effect on use-of-force outcomes proved measurable. When the city commissioned an analysis of police shootings before and after the program launched, the data told a clearer story.
"The city did an analysis for us and they looked at the number of police shootings the five years before we started CIT. And there were 90 — which is a lot. That's one police department. And over the next 15 to 20 years, it was down to — I think it was like 12 or 13." — Judge Steve Leifman
Leifman attributes that reduction not only to better tactical training, but to the mental health of the officers themselves.
"I think PTSD among law enforcement plays a significant role — maybe a larger role. And it turns out that when we get officers treated and they don't panic when they're in a situation where they may get scared, they're less likely to pull a trigger. Everybody wins there when you do that." — Judge Steve Leifman
The financial implications of that shift were eventually recognized beyond law enforcement. When Miami's mayor presented the city's bond rating for review, the reviewers set aside the economic development data and focused on a single question: how had the city reduced its police shootings so significantly? Lower shootings meant fewer settlements. Fewer settlements meant lower fiscal risk.
"They were actually able to get their bond rating improved because they significantly reduced their police shootings. And the only thing that really had changed during that period was CIT." — Judge Steve Leifman
The Cost of Doing Nothing
Narrow the lens to just the thousand individuals in that population who had been arrested five or more times — and the numbers don't get smaller. They get more alarming.
"Those thousand people spent 317,000 days in the Dade County jail over five years. They cost taxpayers over $117 million. And we got nothing for it." — Judge Steve Leifman
Releasing someone from custody without a treatment plan does not resolve a crisis. It defers it. The person returns. The call goes out again. The cycle continues at public expense. Leifman places that reality alongside a medical analogy that strips away any pretense of logic from the current approach.
"We wouldn't treat people with cancer or heart disease the way we treat people with mental illnesses. If someone has a heart attack on the side of the street, we're going to call 911. They'll be taken to a hospital. If they need emergency surgery, they're going to get involuntary treatment against their will — no one's asked. But then they're going to have a really good shot at having a full and happy life. But God forbid you have a heart attack of the brain where you have a psychotic disorder. We're kind of scared of you. We're going to let you hang out on the street and watch your brain deficits increase by allowing your gray matter to get destroyed over a decade." — Judge Steve Leifman
A New Outcome Is Possible
The post-arrest diversion track within the Miami Model was designed to interrupt exactly that trajectory. When individuals identified in the jail as having serious mental illness were transferred to crisis stabilization within seventy-two hours — rather than waiting months for trial — the outcomes were sufficient to change the position of the state attorney's office.
"Recidivism dropped from about 75 to 20 percent. And the state attorney agreed to try it with non-violent felony cases. Similar program — recidivism went from 75 percent to six percent." — Judge Steve Leifman
Those numbers, sustained over time, eventually justified something that would have seemed implausible at the program's outset.
"We closed one of our jails — which for us so far has saved Dade County about $239 million in actual savings." — Judge Steve Leifman
It is a result that tends to silence the argument that reform is too expensive to attempt.
"We know treatment works. We know that the faster we get people treated, the better outcomes we're gonna get. And when you do this whole approach, everybody wins." — Judge Steve Leifman
"I think there's really three reasons. One is it improves public safety. Two, it saves critical tax dollars. And three, gives people who are just sick an opportunity to have a life of hope and opportunity. And there's really no reason not to do it — because the way we do it now is expensive. It doesn't work. It makes things worse." — Judge Steve Leifman
That is the conclusion Miami reached after twenty-five years of data. It is the conclusion Texas is reaching through its own experience.