US court stops NYC stop-and-frisk ruling

A federal appeals court has halted a judge’s order which called for changes to the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk program.

The three-judge panel, which issued the ruling on Thursday, said the lower court judge, Shira A. Scheindlin, “ran afoul” of the judicial code of conduct, removing Scheindlin from the case.

The appeals court said Scheindlin jeopardized “the appearance of partiality… by a series of media interviews and public statements purporting to respond publicly to criticism of the District Court.”

The appeals court ruling was a temporary victory for New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the NYPD officials, who have asserted that stop-and-frisk tactics have led to a marked decline in crime rates.

“We could not be more pleased with the Court’s findings,” said Corporation Counsel Michael Cardozo, the city’s chief attorney, who called Scheindlin’s ruling “unjustified and deeply problematic.”

In August, Scheindlin ruled that New York police’s stop-and-frisk tactics are in violation of New Yorkers’ constitutional rights.

She ordered a federal monitor to oversee changes to NYPD practices. Many racial minorities in New York, who complained innocent people were being arrested in the police sweeps, celebrated the ruling.

Scheindlin ruled that civil rights of innumerable people, including black and Hispanic men, were trampled underfoot by the NYPD.

Thus, she asked an outsider to monitor important changes, including reforms in policies, training and supervision.

She also ordered a pilot program to test body-worn cameras in areas where most stops happen.

The New York Civil Liberties Union demonstrated in a 2012 report that there had been a sharp increase in the number of police stops over the period of Bloomberg’s three terms in office.

The number of searches rose from 160,851 stops in 2003 to 685,724 in 2011, while half of the 2011 searches included physical searches.