Judicial panel suspends 'Stop and Frisk' ruling
A federal appeals court has suspended a ruling ordering changes to 'Stop and Frisk.'
A panel of three federal judges in New York on Thursday stayed an earlier ruling that halted a city policy giving police wide latitude in stopping and questioning people they deem suspicious.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has granted a stay of an August ruling that ordered a host of changes and reviews in the practice of "Stop and Frisk," a policy that gives New York Police Department officers wide latitude in stopping anyone they deem suspicious. The August ruling also held that "Stop and Frisk" violated Constitutional amendments prohibiting unreasonable searches and seizures, and guaranteeing equal protection.
n issuing the decision, the court also pulled Judge Shira Schiendlin from the case, citing an "appearance of partiality surrounding this litigation."
The ruling accused Scheindlin of steering the case toward her courtroom when it was initially filed five years ago.
Representatives for the city of New York, whose leaders touted "Stop and Frisk" as an effective crime deterrent, were happy.
"This is an important decision for all New Yorkers and for the men and women of the New York City Police Department, who work very hard day in and day out to keep this city safe," Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said in a statement. "Their reputation was unfairly besmirched by Judge Scheindlin's decision and I am pleased that independent judges have begun to look at this case and have stayed her decision."
"We could not be more pleased with the court's findings," said Michael Cardozo, the city's corporation counsel. "This ruling not only ensures that the remedies ordered by the district court ... will be put on hold during our appeal, but it stays the liability decision on the POlice Department's compliance with the Constitution. In short, the fuling of onconstitutional practices is no longer operative, and that question will now receive a fresh and independent look both by the appeals court and then, if necessary, by a differen trial court judge."
Civil rights organizations complained that minority males represented the majority of people stopped under the policy.
The civil rights community expressed disappointment in the ruling.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/31/stop-frisk-stay-ruling/3330715/
FINDINGNAMO, SNAFU, THEATERDIVE, JORDANCATALONO, LIZASHEADBAND, PALJOEY: You all claim to "IGNORE ME" I wish you would and stop constantly commenting on my posts. Thanks ......................................................................................................................................
The MOST POPULAR and DANGEROUS Poster on BWW! Banned by the PTA, PTC and the MEANGIRLS of BWW.....................................................................................................................
...Ukraine Girls really knock me out, they leave the west behind..........................
Updated On: 11/1/13 at 10:30 AM
.jpg?format=auto&width=300)
