NYPD's Stop and Frisk Policy: Unconstitutional, but Still Open for Business?
August 16, 2013
After 11 years of violating New Yorkers’ constitutional rights, a U.S. District Judge issued a ruling this week declaring the NYPD’s Stop and Frisk program unconstitutional. Judge Shira Sheindlin described the program as a form of institutional racial profiling – which civil liberties groups realized long before the ruling.
In the 195-page decision, Sheindlin concluded that the police stops violated the Fourth Amendment, which protects Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures, and the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection before the law for all Americans.
Taken alongside a number of damning reports by respected civil liberties groups which documented the NYPD’s increased number of stops in minority communities, Sheindlin’s ruling concluded that officers routinely stopped “blacks and Hispanics who would not have been stopped if they were white.”
During the 5-year long trial, one of the most appalling admissions of constitutional disregard came out when the court learned that NYPD officers had a stop and frisk quota. According to one officer, each officer was expected to conduct at least five stop and frisks, one arrest and 20 written tickets each month. According to the New York Civil Liberties Union, the NYPD logged in its five millionth stop and frisk under Mayor Michael Bloomberg in March.
After the ruling, Bloomberg stated that the city did not receive a fair trial and would be appealing the decision. His decision to appeal is an odd reaction to a ruling that did not effectively end the program, merely ruling it unconstitutional. The judge’s ruling called for strict restrictions and placed the NYPD under a third party who will review the policy and make necessary changes to restore Constitutional guarantees.
Sheindlin also included “an immediate change to certain policies and activities of the NYPD, a trial program requiring the use of body-worn cameras in one precinct per borough and a community-based joint remedial process to be conducted by a court-appointed facilitator.”
If Bloomberg and NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly both continue to publicly assure New Yorkers that “race is never a reason to conduct a stop,” then why would they vocally pushback on the ruling?
The stop and frisk program is both counterproductive, making communities less trustful of law enforcement, and ineffective. It is an affront to our Constitution. Ending the program would be a better option than revising it.
IN THIS SECTION
- Empowering American Muslim Voices
- Tackling Violent Extremism in America
- An Interview with Chris Seiple
- 114th Congress: Deliver or Disappoint?
- Jerusalem: More Divided Than Ever
- New DoJ Guidance Unacceptable
RELATED STORIES
-
"The Japanese/Muslim American Experience" Panel in SoCal
April 13, 2017 -
"Protecting Civil Rights" Panel in LA
April 6, 2017 -
"Know Your Rights" Workshop in SoCal
April 2, 2017
RELATED MULTIMEDIA
-
Al-Marayati interviewed on Viewpoint on Hate Speech
July 29, 2011 -
Muslim Serve Health Fair & Interfaith Peace Vigil
September 24, 2010 -
9/11 Interfaith Peace Vigil
September 11, 2010 -
Khutba on Islamophobia
September 10, 2010
one-time or monthly donation.