Reform is the best the plaintiffs can hope for in stop-and-frisk caseIan Weinstein in NY Daily News, March 19, 2013
Written by: Ian Weinstein
If the plaintiffs in Floyd vs. the City of New York are successful, it wouldn’t end “stop-and-frisk,” but it could change the way it’s implemented.
The plaintiffs say the NYPD has a “pattern and practice” of disobeying constitutional limits by engaging in suspicionless stops and arresting people, mainly minority-group members, without probable cause. They also allege that some police supervisors have set quotas on the numbers of stops.
The NYPD denies there are quotas and says its officers are targeting high-crime areas.
The plaintiffs are seeking a court order to require the NYPD and the city to make changes, including training on constitutional rules and reforming the way data on stops are collected.
If they win, it would likely decrease the overall number of stops, but there’s also reason to think there are many entirely lawful stops that could continue.