Obama, in surprise move, wades into NYPD 'stop and frisk' lawsuit

A federal judge is poised to rule soon on the constitutionality of the NYPD's controversial 'stop and frisk' policy. The Obama administration this week said nothing on that point, but it did state its preferred remedy if the city loses the case.

By Harry Bruinius,?Correspondent / June 13, 2013

District Court Judge Shira Scheindlin is interviewed in her federal court chambers, in New York, May 17. Scheindlin is the federal judge presiding over civil rights challenges to the stop-and-frisk practices of the New York Police Department.

Richard Drew/AP

Enlarge

The New York Police Department's controversial "stop and frisk" policy received a kick in the shins this week, when the Obama administration took the unusual step of outlining its preferred remedy in the event a federal judge examining the NYPD tactic rules it to be unconstitutional.?

Skip to next paragraph

' + google_ads[0].line2 + '
' + google_ads[0].line3 + '

'; } else if (google_ads.length > 1) { ad_unit += ''; } } document.getElementById("ad_unit").innerHTML += ad_unit; google_adnum += google_ads.length; return; } var google_adnum = 0; google_ad_client = "pub-6743622525202572"; google_ad_output = 'js'; google_max_num_ads = '1'; google_feedback = "on"; google_ad_type = "text"; // google_adtest = "on"; google_image_size = '230x105'; google_skip = '0'; // -->

Subscribe Today to the Monitor

Click Here for your FREE 30 DAYS of
The Christian Science Monitor
Weekly Digital Edition

The US Department of Justice told the court, in a surprise last-minute filing, that?it would prefer an independent monitor to help ensure changes, should the city of New York lose this case.

The government filed its ?statement of interest,? however, somewhat reluctantly. It would have preferred to weigh in ?if, and only if,? the statement said, the court had already found the NYPD?s tactics violate the Constitution. But the judge in the case, Shira Scheindlin, had consolidated the so-called liability and remedy phases of the trial, requiring all interested parties to submit their briefs before she makes her decision, expected this summer.

The Justice Department (DOJ) offered no opinion on the constitutionality of this crime-fighting tactic, which allows any New York City police officer to stop, question, and frisk a person for weapons if the officer reasonably suspects that person is engaged in a criminal activity. But it did zero in on the most contentious of the remedies sought by the private citizens who brought the class-action lawsuit: the appointment of an independent monitor to oversee changes in the NYPD.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly have each bristled at the suggestion of an independent monitor throughout the course of the 2-1/2-month trial, which ended in May. They cite the "stop and frisk" policy as instrumental in driving down the city's crime rate.

?We think that a monitor would be even more disruptive than an IG,? responded Mayor Bloomberg on Thursday, also referring to a separate City Council proposal to appoint an inspector general for the NYPD. ?It just makes no sense whatsoever, when lives are on the line, to try to change the rules and hamper the police department from doing their job.... They comply with the law. We are 100 percent confident in that,? he said Thursday at a press conference in Queens.

But the trial did not go well for the city, some observers believe. The Justice Department?s last-minute filing may indicate that it, too, feels it must weigh in at this late stage because the city will probably lose the case.

Source: http://rss.csmonitor.com/~r/feeds/csm/~3/M0KF4y8FSYU/Obama-in-surprise-move-wades-into-NYPD-stop-and-frisk-lawsuit

Demi Lovato iOS 6 Features big brother iOS 6 bank of america Yunel Escobar Eye Black Cruel Summer