Stop and Frisk Limits

For John, BLUF:  It isn't just NSA eating away at our rights.

---

The New York City Police Department has a Stop and Frisk Program, which involves over half a million stops a year, the disproportionate number being Blacks and Latinos (88% of stops).  This derives from a US Supreme Court decision, which led to the concept of the Terry Stop:

The name derives from Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that police may briefly detain a person who they reasonably suspect is involved in criminal activity; the Court also held that police may do a limited search of the suspect’s outer garments for weapons if they have a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the person detained may be “armed and dangerous”.  When a search for weapons is authorized, the procedure is known as a “stop and frisk”.

Now, Blogger and Law Professor Ann Althouse notes that a Federal Judge rules "NYC stop-and-frisk practice violates rights", after a 2-month trial.  Quoting from an article in The New York Times, Professor Althouse ledes with:

Relying on a complex statistical analysis presented at trial, Judge Scheindlin found that the racial composition of a census tract played a role in predicting how many stops would occur.

Per the newspaper, correction included:

The judge designated an outside lawyer, Peter L. Zimroth, to monitor the Police Department’s compliance with the [US] Constitution.

Judge Scheindlin also ordered a number of other remedies, including a pilot program in which officers in at least five precincts across the city will wear body-worn cameras in an effort to record street encounters.  She also ordered a “joint remedial process” — in essence, a series of community meetings — to solicit public input on how to reform stop-and-frisk.

I did find it unfortunate that Judge Scheindlin used the term "whites" to describe people originating from the Eurasian land mass.

Regards  —  Cliff