What role did COVID-19 and pandemic-era policies play in US crime trends after 2019?
Executive summary
COVID-19 and related policies coincided with a sharp, unusual rise in homicides beginning in 2020 and large short-term shifts in many other crime types — property crimes generally fell during stay-at-home periods while domestic violence and cybercrime concerns rose — and by 2024–25 overall violent and property crime rates had returned to or fallen below pre‑pandemic levels [1] [2] [3] [4]. Researchers and policy analysts attribute those patterns to a mix of pandemic-era disruptions (mobility, schooling, employment), changes in policing and incarceration, public trust and prosecutorial choices, and subsequent targeted investments in violence intervention — but the literature stresses that causal certainty is limited and local variation is large [5] [6] [7].
1. The immediate shock: lockdowns reshaped opportunities for crime
When stay‑at‑home orders began in spring 2020, routine‑activity changes produced predictable effects: many acquisitive crimes — especially residential burglary and some thefts — fell as more people stayed home, while commercial burglaries and certain fraud and cybercrimes rose as criminals exploited closed businesses and online vulnerabilities [2] [8] [9]. City‑level studies show timing matters: short, sharp declines in some offenses during lockdown were followed by differing return‑to‑normal speeds across crime types and places [10] [2].
2. Homicide spike and violent crime volatility: a pandemic-era exception
The most striking anomaly was a large increase in homicide and gun violence beginning in 2020 and peaking through 2021; many analysts call this a “pandemic‑era surge.” Multiple reports and reviews link the timing to pandemic disruptions — school and program closures, economic stress, and altered daily life — though they also emphasize that the precise drivers differ by city and neighborhood and remain contested [1] [11] [12]. By 2023–25, homicides and many forms of violent crime started to decline again in numerous cities, returning toward or below pre‑pandemic levels in aggregate [6] [4] [13].
3. Criminal justice practices, decarceration and reporting shifts
Pandemic policies changed criminal‑justice operations: arrests and jail bookings fell sharply in 2020 (jail bookings down ~39% in some multi‑jurisdiction studies), courts and arraignments were disrupted, and decarceration for health reasons temporarily reduced confinement levels [14] [15] [16]. Scholars warn these changes complicate interpretation of official crime counts because reporting, policing activity and charging practices shifted during and after the pandemic [14] [17].
4. Policy responses: emergency funding, violence intervention, and partisan debate
Post‑2020, cities and philanthropies deployed pandemic relief dollars and new programs — notably scaled-up community violence intervention (CVI) funded in part by the American Rescue Plan — which many local leaders and criminologists cite as a factor in the later declines in shootings and homicides [7] [18] [19]. At the same time, commentators and advocacy groups argue over whether “policy changes” (e.g., prosecutorial discretion, police staffing) or pandemic shocks drove the surge; voices on different sides point to the same post‑pandemic trends to support competing political narratives [20] [21] [18].
5. Non‑street crimes and enduring shifts: cybercrime, fraud, and vehicle theft
The pandemic accelerated online activity and with it cyberfraud and exploitation, prompting federal and international law‑enforcement responses (FBI working groups, Europol attention) and documented increases in COVID‑related scams and online child‑exploitation detections [9] [22]. Motor vehicle thefts rose beginning in 2020 and in some places maintained higher levels through 2023, even as other crimes fell [11] [23].
6. What the evidence cannot yet settle: causation and local heterogeneity
Major reviews and quantitative studies stress limits: much research describes timing and correlation rather than proving a single causal mechanism, and outcomes varied greatly across cities, neighborhoods and crime types [5] [6]. National statistics through 2024–25 show overall violent and property crime rates falling to historic lows after the pandemic surge, but researchers caution that aggregated trends mask uneven local experiences and measurement complications [4] [1].
7. Bottom line for policymakers and the public
Available reporting and studies agree the pandemic was a major disruptive force that altered crime patterns — lowering many property offenses during lockdowns, coinciding with an exceptional homicide surge, and accelerating cyber and fraud threats — and that subsequent policy choices (relief funding, CVI, policing and prosecutorial decisions) helped shape the recovery. However, scholars explicitly warn that disentangling those influences with high confidence is difficult and that local context matters for any policy lesson [2] [6] [18].