NYPD Abandons the Practice of Extending Stops

NYPD has settled a legal case that required it to abandon using prolonged street stops. The stops were used to check for arrest warrants and ties to other cases, tactic critics called a “digital stop and frisk.”

The settlement entails that officers can only conduct warrant searches during street stops on the conditions that:

• They have solid grounds to believe that the person they stopped was committing, just finished committing, or is about to commit a crime,
• There is an element of reasonable suspicion that the person possesses an illegal item.

The NYPD’s Stop and Frisk Policy

The NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policy has been a controversial topic for many years. A judge determined in 2013 that the program amounted to indirect racial profiling. This latest lawsuit, filed in 2019, challenged the stops as a violation of the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on illegal arrest, detention, and unlawful search and seizure.

According to a plaintiff, Terron Belle, the NYPD’s lengthy stops violated “the rights of other Black and Latinx people.” The Legal Aid Society filed the lawsuit with two outside law firms. Plaintiffs’ lawyer Cyrus Joubin remarked that the lawsuit “always brings about justice to innocent New Yorkers who are baselessly detained.”

The practice has been featured on TV shows like “Law & Order” and “NYPD Blue.” Critics say the policy only works for officers carrying smartphones that can instantly access NYPD databases. Detained individuals frequently assert that they did nothing wrong and that the police had no justification for stopping them.

The NYPD’s Revised Stop Policy

The NYPD has revised the stop policy and is conducting training. The department informed all of the officers of the change by email, and for the next ten days, it will be read aloud at each shift’s roll call. According to the agreement, violations could lead to department discipline.

Opposed to why the NYPD initially implemented the stop policy, it has now become a random fishing expedition, according to Molly Griffard, an attorney with the Legal Aid Society’s Cop Accountability Project. The agreement “was limited to these individual plaintiffs without a broad issue,” according to Nicholas Paolucci, a city law department spokesman.

The NYPD is dedicated to defending peoples’ constitutional rights. To make it clear when officers may run a warrant query while a person is being detained, it has decided to clarify current rules, Paolucci said.

By January 31st, all officers must have received the new policy training mandated by the agreement. It will also cover the five identified plaintiffs’ legal costs and $453,733 damages. Each plaintiff will earn anywhere from $3,000 to $19,000.

However, some law enforcement unions and pro-police elected officials have criticized the decision. They argued that it would make it difficult for officers to keep suspected criminals off the streets. City Council Member Joann Ariola was one of the people who opposed the decision.

In a tweet by the city’s detectives’ union, Ariola said it is “another decision that empowers criminals & prevents police from doing their jobs.” She also mentioned the need to prioritize public safety in the city.

Conclusion

The NYPD’s decision to abandon the practice is a step forward in protecting the rights of individuals. It will also ensure that the department is constitutionally conducting stops. “Despite the criticisms, it will be essential to see how the revised stop policy is implemented and if it has a meaningful impact.” says attorney Jeffrey Lichtman of The Law Offices of Jeffrey Lichtman.