Rights Group Praises Stop and Frisk Ruling by Federal Judge

[email protected]
 

August 17, 2012, New York – In response today’s ruling by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, which excluded as untested and unreliable key portions of the proposed testimony of New York City’s key witness in a class-action lawsuit challenging the NYPD’s stop and frisk practices, Floyd et al. v. City of New York, et al., Center for Constitutional Rights Executive Director Vincent Warren issued the following statement:

Judge Scheindlin’s ruling confirms what those challenging stop and frisk have been saying for years: there is no evidence that the practice reduces crime and, in any event, the issue in the case is not whether stop and frisk is a good or bad crime-fighting strategy, but whether the practice is legal and constitutional, and whether these police stops respect, or violate, people’s rights. The ruling soundly rejects the false choice propounded by the NYPD, between living in a safe city and being free of unconstitutional, racially discriminatory policing.

Bedlock, Levine & Hoffman, and Covington & Burling, are co-counsel in the case.

The Center for Constitutional Rights works with communities under threat to fight for justice and liberation through litigation, advocacy, and strategic communications. Since 1966, the Center for Constitutional Rights has taken on oppressive systems of power, including structural racism, gender oppression, economic inequity, and governmental overreach. Learn more at ccrjustice.org.

 

Last modified 

August 17, 2012

Press Inquiries

Please contact us for general press inquiries, or to set up interviews.

[email protected]

Staff Experts

We can connect you with just the right person at CCR for the story you’re working on.