A federal appeals court rejected the city’s request that Judge Shira Scheindlin’s findings that the NYPD’s use of stop and frisk was unconstitutional be thrown out. File Photo
A federal appeals court rejected the city’s request to throw out Judge Shira Scheindlin’s controversial ruling that the NYPD’s use of stop-and-frisk is unconstitutional and that the police department must undergo a series of changes, including the implementation of a monitor who would oversee reforms.
The same court also denied Scheindlin’s bid to be able to address the court and defend herself after the federal appeals court kicked her off the stop-and-frisk case, questioning her impartiality on the matter.
The three-judge panel from the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals issued its five-page decision last Friday, which comes after a federal appeals court’s ruling about one month ago that halted planned reforms to the NYPD and booted Scheindlin from the case.
While an appeals process is still ongoing, that appeal is expected to be withdrawn when Mayor Bloomberg leaves office and Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio takes over in January. If the appeal is withdrawn, that would likely translate to Scheindlin’s demands for NYPD reforms becoming reality. Alongside the request for a monitor, the federal judge had also ordered that officers across the city should wear cameras to record street encounters.
Scheindlin in August had lambasted the stop-and-frisk policy, in which cops will pat down individuals they believe could be carrying weapons – a tactic that Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said has driven down crime to historic lows but which other legislators said overwhelmingly targets minorities and has driven a wedge between the NYPD and minority communities.
“I find that the city is liable for violating plaintiffs’ Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights,” Scheindlin wrote in her decision, which did not force the city to halt its practice but aimed to bring increased scrutiny. “The city acted with deliberate indifference toward the NYPD’s practice of making unconstitutional stops and conducting unconstitutional frisks.”
Queens legislators have been split on the issue of stop-and-frisk, with some supporting and some not. Councilman Eric Ulrich (R-Ozone Park) and Councilwoman Elizabeth Crowley (D-Middle Village) have, for example, thrown their support behind the tactic, while others, including Councilman Mark Weprin (D-Little Neck) and Councilman Leroy Comrie (D-St. Albans), have lambasted the procedure.
