The controversial "stop and frisk" tactic that has become common among the New York Police Department violate the constitutional rights of minorities a federal judge ruled in a decision calling for changes in the way the tactic has been used as well as a federal monitor to ensure that changes are made, according to the New York Times.
Judge Shira Scheindlin of the Manhattan Federal Court ruled that the NYPD's policy of stopping citizens for no apparent reason and searching them for weapons or other contraband violated both the Fourth Amendment guaranteeing protection from unreasonable searches and the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, according to the New York Times.
"The city adopted a policy of indirect racial profiling by targeting racially defined groups for stops based on local crime suspect data," Scheindlin wrote in her ruling. "This has resulted in the disproportionate and discriminatory stopping of blacks and Hispanics in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.
Scheindlin also found that "the city acted with deliberate indifference toward the NYPD's practice of making unconstitutional stops and conducting unconstitutional frisk," according to the Wall Street Journal.
In her ruling Scheindlin says that police officers felt pressured by both Mayor Michael Bloomberg and NYPD Commissioner to use the tactic. In 2003, one year after Bloomberg took office, there were 160,851 reported stops. That number skyrocketed to 635,724 stops by 2011. Bloomberg has argued that the "stop and frisk" policy has been integral in keeping illegal guns off of the streets of New York City, according to Reuters.
In the years between 2004 and 2012 more than 4.4 million stops were made by the NYPD. Ninety percent of the time the individual would walk away without being charged of a crime. Over 80 percent of the people stopped were either black or Hispanic, according to the Wall Street Journal.
In her ruling Scheindlin was careful to point out that the ruling was not calling for a total abolition of the tactic which had been ruled legal by the Supreme Court many years ago, according to the New York Times.
"[This ruling is] not ordering an end to the practice of 'stop and frisk,'" Scheindlin wrote. "The purpose of the remedies addressed in this opinion is to ensure that the practice is carried out in a manner that protects the rights and liberties of all New Yorkers, while still providing much needed police protection."
The ruling was celebrated by critics of the tactic including the Rev. Al Sharpton.
"[This is] a huge victory for those of us that have marched and fought against it for years saying it is a violation of our constitutional and civil rights," Sharpton told the Wall Street Journal. "The Bloomberg Administration should immediately cease and desist the 'stop and frisk' policy."
A statement about the ruling is expected from Mayor Michael Bloomberg at 1 p.m. EST.
