Tag Archives: U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin

City files to appeal stop-and-frisk ruling


| lguerre@queenscourier.com

NYC Mayor's Office's Flickr/Photo by Edward Reed

The city has filed to appeal U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin’s ruling that the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policy is unconstitutional.

The appeal comes after Mayor Michael Bloomberg expressed his dislike for the decision on Monday and promised the city would fight the ruling in the case of Floyd vs City of New York. The appeal was filed electronically Friday with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, which will send the appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

“We have moved ahead with our formal filings,”  said Michael Cardozo, Corporation Counsel. “The mayor, the police commissioner and the city vowed to press forward immediately with an appeal — and we have done so. The safety of all New Yorkers is at stake.”

Minorities groups and some politicians have been fighting the policy, saying that stop-and-frisk is unfairly used against black and Hispanics. They have since applauded Schedindlin’s ruling and denounced the decision to appeal it.

“The overuse and abuse of stop-and-frisk is driving police and communities apart instead of making our city safer,” said Public Advocate Bill de Blasio. “Mayor Bloomberg’s decision to appeal the federal court’s ruling is wrong and deeply misguided.”

In Scheindlin’s decision on Monday she suggested reforms to stop-and-frisk. She appointed lawyer Peter Zimroth to monitor the NYPD and ordered that officers wear body cameras.

“I find that the city is liable for violating plaintiffs’ Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights,” Scheindlin wrote. “The city acted with deliberate indifference toward the NYPD’s practice of making unconstitutional stops and conducting unconstitutional frisks.”

During a press conference after Scheindlin’s decision, Bloomberg said that the judge’s ruling was unfair.

“Throughout the trail that just concluded the judge made it clear that she was not at all interested in the crime reductions here [(in the city] or how we achieved them,” Bloomberg said.  “Through the case we didn’t believe that we were getting a fair trial and this decision confirms that suspicion,” he later added.

The city is going to request a “stay” before Scheindlin, to postpone her judgement during the appeals process.

RECOMMENDED STORIES 

 

 

Judge rules NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policy unconstitutional


| lguerre@queenscourier.com

THE COURIER/ Photo by Liam La Guerre

Score another win for opponents of the NYPD’s controversial stop-and-frisk policy.

U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled Monday that the police department’s use of the policy is unconstitutional and suggested the appointment of a monitor to reform it.

“I find that the city is liable for violating plaintiffs’ Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights,” Scheindlin wrote. “The city acted with deliberate indifference toward the NYPD’s practice of making unconstitutional stops and conducting unconstitutional frisks.”

The ruling comes months after the City Council approved the Community Safety Act, which contained a bill to easy it easier to take the NYPD to court over discrimination cases. Mayor Michael Bloomberg vetoed the Community Safety Act a few weeks ago and criticized Scheindlin’s decision.

“Throughout the trail that just concluded the judge made it clear that she was not at all interested in the crime reductions here (in the city) or how we achieved them,” Bloomberg said at a press conference today.

He later added, “Through the case we didn’t believe that we were getting a fair trial and this decision confirms that suspicion.”

Minorities groups have been fighting the policy, saying that stop-and-frisk is unfairly used against black and Hispanics. Scheindlin confirmed this belief with her judgment.

“In practice, the policy encourages the targeting of young black and Hispanic men based on their prevalence in local crime complaints,” Scheindlin wrote. “This is a form of racial profiling.”

Scheindlin didn’t rule to dispatch the policy completely, but just to reform it.

“The opinion does not call for the NYPD to abandon proactive policing and return to an era of less effective police practices,” Scheindlin said.

Proponents of stop-and-frisk disagreed with Scheindlin’s ruling and called the decision to add a monitor to the program unnecessary.

“The NYPD does not need an additional monitor,” said Councilmember Peter Vallone Jr, although he did agree though that the policy should be reformed. “We can agree on that and move forward to continue reform stop-and-risk but make sure that continues to happen so that we save young lives.”

Opponents of the stop-and-frisk policy are embracing the ruling whole-heartedly.

“The ruling issued by Judge Scheindlin only confirms what so many New Yorkers already know, that the way stop, question, and frisk has been implemented is a violation of people’s constitutional rights,” said Councilmember Leroy Comrie. “The public wants the police to keep them safe, and the reforms mandated by this ruling will help hold the NYPD accountable, while also forcing changes to policies that will build a stronger relationship between precincts and the communities they are trying to protect.”

Bloomberg said they city will appeal the decision.

 

RECOMMENDED STORIES