Last Thursday, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit suspended a wide range of reforms to the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk policy, which had been established by Judge Shira Scheindlin earlier this year. Dubiously citing judicial misconduct and inappropriate behavior, the Appeals Court was not only misguided in its decision to overthrow Scheindlin’s ruling, it also severely weakened the chance for substantial improvements to be made to the unconstitutional police method.
The Appeals Court suspended a landmark ruling Scheindlin made in August, which determined that the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policy failed to adhere to the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches without probable cause. Scheindlin justifiably wrote in her judgement that the policy “perpetuates the stubborn racial disparities in our criminal justice system,” violating the 14th Amendment of equal protection by discriminately targeting black and Hispanic people. Her ruling also ushered in a series of reforms within the confines of her power to remedy this policy, including improvements to NYPD training and requiring that officers wear body cameras to document their actions. An independent monitor would also have been appointed to ensure the improvements were carried out.
The court’s decision to block Scheindlin’s ruling is an abandonment of justice. The reasons cited by the Appeals Court do not take issue with the ruling itself, rather taking grievance with Scheindlin herself. The Court reprimanded her for sitting for nterviews during the time of the case, which it believed gave the appearance of judicial impropriety. Indeed, Mayor Michael Bloomberg ridiculed Scheindlin’s original judgement, stating that “Throughout the trial … the judge made it clear she was not at all interested in the crime reductions here or how we achieved them.”
The decision reached by the Appeals Court negates that the policies suggested by Scheindlin are entirely appropriate. Last year, New Yorkers were stopped by the NYPD 532,911 times. Of those stopped, 89 percent were innocent. Black and Hispanic people were overwhelmingly targeted. Only 10 percent of those stopped were white, while 55 percent were black and 32 percent Latino — numbers completely disproportionate to the demography of New York. As the NYPD themselves admit, 9 out 10 New Yorkers who are stopped are completely innocent.
“Justice delayed is justice denied” — the legal maxim could not be more fitting in this latest development of the stop-and-frisk chronicle. The Appeals Court made a misguided decision, with legal technicality trumping the rights of minorities. But efforts to reform the NYPD’s policies should not just reside in the court. Consistent constitutional injury should not be the norm on the streets of New York. The next mayor must pass substantive reforms that outlaw this unacceptable practice. Scheindlin was brave enough to speak out. She should be applauded, not resisted.
A version of this article appeared in the Monday, Nov. 4 print edition. Harry Brown is a staff columnist. Email him at [email protected].
