Judge Rules 'Stop and Frisk' Unconstitutional

She appoints independent monitor to watch NYPD
By Kevin Spak,  Newser Staff
Posted Aug 12, 2013 8:57 AM CDT
Judge Rules 'Stop and Frisk' Unconstitutional
In this Sunday June 17, 2012, file photograph, the Rev. Al Sharpton, center, walks with demonstrators during a silent march to end the "stop-and-frisk" program in New York.   (AP Photo/Seth Wenig, File)

The NYPD's controversial stop-and-frisk policy violates New Yorkers' Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure, a federal judge declared today. Judge Shira A. Sheindlin said she would appoint an independent lawyer to monitor the NYPD and ensure it didn't continue the policy, or otherwise behave unconstitutionally. The New York Times believes that additional judicial oversight will shape the policing tactics of the next mayor.

While the Supreme Court has long held that police have the authority to stop people who are acting suspiciously, Sheindlin ruled that police didn't have reasonable suspicion in most stop-and-frisk incidents. As evidence, she cited the fact that 88% of stop-and-frisk targets were released without so much as a ticket being issued. (More stop and frisk stories.)

Get the news faster.
Tap to install our app.
Install the Newser News app
in two easy steps:
1. Tap in your navigation bar.
2. Tap to Add to Home Screen.