NYPD can chalk up at least a temporary victory: They will not yet have to make the changes to their stop-and-frisk policies ordered by a judge while they appeal the ruling. Furthermore, the appeals court said the judge needed to be removed from the case. From the Associated Press:
A federal appeals court on Thursday blocked a judge's order requiring changes to the New York Police Department's stop-and-frisk program and removed the judge from the case.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the decisions of Judge Shira Scheindlin will be stayed pending the outcome of an appeal by the city.
The judge had ruled in August the city violated the Constitution in the way it carried out its program of stopping and questioning people. The city appealed her findings and her remedial orders, including a decision to assign a monitor to help the police department change its policy and training program associated with it.
The appeals court heard arguments Tuesday on the requested stay.
The appeals court said the judge needed to be removed from the case because she ran afoul of the code of conduct for U.S. judges by compromising the necessity for a judge to avoid the appearance of partiality in part because of a series of media interviews and public statements responding publicly to criticism of the court.
Her ruling didn’t call for the end of the stop-and-frisk policy, it should be pointed out. She called for a federal monitor to help the department develop reforms to end the unconstitutional targeting of minorities, proper documenting of pat-downs, and the use of body cameras, among other things.
Follow this story and more at Reason 24/7.
Spice up your blog or Website with Reason 24/7 news and Reason articles. You can get the widgets here. If you have a story that would be of interest to Reason's readers please let us know by emailing the 24/7 crew at firstname.lastname@example.org, or tweet us stories at @reason247.