Appeals Court Refuses To Overturn Ruling That Ends Stop And Frisk In NYC [Updated]

from the court-stops-motion,-misses-opportunity-to-thoroughly-Fisk-it dept

[Update: New York defense attorney Scott Greenfield sends over some input on this latest twist in the stop and frisk saga. The situation isn’t quite as simple as my post made it appear. While time is running out for the city of New York to battle this ruling before de Blasio steps in, it still has options available that could make this a much tougher battle for opponents of the program.

The motion panel denied summary reversal, but that has zero to do with the appeal. It was just an interim ploy. Whether de Blasio will continue the appeal, drop it or settle the case has yet to be seen. It’s awkward for de Blasio, as even if he agrees that the Bloomberg policy is dead wrong, he won’t want to give up control to an outside monitor.

But by no means is this a done deal on any end. The only thing denied was summary reversal; everything else remains on the table, so to suggest it’s all over is not at all correct. There remains a whole lot left in issue and bad things can still happen. Very bad things.

One of those bad things is this:

There is still plenty of time for the city to get its brief in under Cardozo/Bloomberg arguing for reversal. This will really put the screws to de Blasio, who would not only have to withdraw the appeal, but do so after the city has submitted and the brief is out there for the world to see.

So, this has only deflected one of the many legal arrows Bloomberg’s counsel can fire off before he exits office. Bloomberg has defended stop-and-frisk bitterly and obstinately over the years, so there’s no reason to believe more last-ditch efforts aren’t being made.]

It looks as though time may run out on Mayor Bloomberg and his fight against Judge Scheindlin’s stop and frisk decision. Even though the Second Circuit Court (questionably) removed Scheindlin from the case for “appearances of bias and impropriety,” it has not allowed New York City to use that as leverage to have her ruling tossed.

A federal appeals panel on Friday denied a request by lawyers for New York that it overturn a judge’s sweeping ruling on the Police Department’s stop-and-frisk practices, all but ending the Bloomberg administration’s ability to legally challenge the ruling.

For the time being, Scheindlin’s court-ordered remedies (body cameras, installation of independent oversight) are still on hold while the court waits to hear the city’s appeal. The city still has the option to re-file this motion once the appeals process has run its course, but by that time, Bill de Blasio will be the new mayor and he has previously stated his opposition to the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk program.

Lis Smith, a spokeswoman for Mr. de Blasio, said the mayor-elect had “been clear: We must move forward on making fundamental reforms to stop-and-frisk. By ending the overuse of this practice, we will make New York safer and begin to repair the relationships between community and police.”

Mayor Bloomberg’s intense defense of the questionable program may turn out to be wasted energy. De Blasio could very well decide Scheindlin’s ruling is correct and drop the city’s appeals.

The vast amount of evidence, much of it collected by the NYPD itself, shows the program resulted in hundreds of thousands of stops of minorities over the last decade, but not much in the way of crime fighting. Despite the constant arguments that it’s responsible for the city’s declining crime rates, the stop-and-frisk program resulted in very few convictions or confiscated weapons. (This visualization shows just how inefficient the program is at finding guns.)

Considering these two factors, the program looks very much like a form of intimidation — something that may lead to reduced crime, but that’s hardly a solid indicator (or a justification) of its supposed usefulness towards that stated end. All sorts of efforts may lead to reduced crime (warrantless searches, a camera in every house) but the ends don’t justify the unconstitutional means, something Bloomberg and police chief Ray Kelly could never seem to wrap their heads around.

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Appeals Court Refuses To Overturn Ruling That Ends Stop And Frisk In NYC [Updated]”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Not Over Yet


Define ?they?.

As I understand it, two other organizations have asked the court to allow them to continue the appeal, even if the city drops it.

Think that was in some of the recent Techdirt stories. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, then I can dig up a reference for you.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Not Over Yet

Here’s a quick Google result?

?NYC Police Unions File Motion To Intervene In Stop-And-Frisk Dispute?, CBS New York, November 7, 2013

Unions Want To Continue Litigation If City Drops Appeal

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork/AP) ? Police unions have asked a federal appeals court to let them continue stop-and-frisk litigation if New York City drops the case?

With a little more digging, I could probably dig up links for the actual motion papers. Or you might be able to dig them up yourself, as quickly as I might.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Don't worry, people...

Test … lol – yes by all means, let there be a test. The plight of the less fortunate manipulated by the wealthy in some sort of twisted game … new reality series to debut on cable tv soon.

Is there any data to support your assumption that SNF reduces crime? If so, what sort of crime are we talking about here – shopping while black? or perhaps simply being non-white. Seriously, harassing people based upon prejudice warrants a seal of approval?

If one were to tabulate all crime within NYC normalized to its detrimental impact upon society as a whole, I imagine that you would find Wall Street to be the epicenter of a major crime spree. But in light of the two sets of rules, certain people are assumed to be above the law and therefore are not pursued for their transgressions.

You get what you deserve? .. really now. Why is it that multitudes of law abiding, hard working people in the lower income brackets “deserve” to be shat upon. I assume your answer will be intriguing.

John Cocktoaston says:

Re: Don't worry, people...

Cops aren’t always qualified to determine who the shitbirds are, as most of them do not live the neighborhood they police. Often these guys harass anybody who is young and a minority.

It’s like stopping and frisking every paunchy middle aged Italian guy because some of them might be in the mafia.

Anonymous Coward says:

once this is finally put to rest as it should be, the next thing to investigate is who instigated the slurring of judge Scheindlin and who recommended her removal from the trial. it seems pretty obvious to me but it needs proving. any other heads that roll will be deserved and the influence of the power mad, overly wealthy, egoist behind it needs exposing and punishing. too, too often, those with wealth use it to implement power and then fear. it needs to be stopped!!

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...