Although many anticipated that Judge Shira A. Scheindlin would rule that New York City's stop-and-frisk policy violates Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, her other finding that the NYPD violated the 14th Amendment by engaging in racial profiling in "stop and frisk" operations has generated controversy. Her decision was revealed over the course of a 195- page opinion. To back up her ruling, Judge Scheindlin cited three separate items of evidence. First, one witness claimed to have heard Mr. Raymond Kelly, the police commissioner, say that the stop-and-frisk tactics were intended to frighten minority men into leaving any guns they owned at home. Judge Scheindlin also said directives made by commmanders and Mayor Bloomberg indicated that the department operated on the idea that young black and Hispanic men were the "right people" to stop. Finally, Judge Scheindlin cited that a statistical analysis of millions of police interactions that revealed that few people subjected to stop-and-frisk methods had engaged in wrongdoing. To read more about Judge Scheindlin's decision and the reaction to her ruling, go here. CPE Board Member Dolores Jones Brown also wrote about the Judges decision in The Crime Report. To read her commentary, please click here.
From the Archive