New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg and NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly have long defended the practice even in the face of challenges from civil liberties groups and minority leaders. They’ve argued repeatedly that the city’s historically low crime rate was proof that stop-and-frisk both works and is a legitimate tool in the fight against the type of violent crime that took hold of New York City in the ’70s and ’80s.
The goal of deterring crime may be “laudable,” Scheindlin acknowledged, but she said, “Many police practices may be useful for fighting crime — preventive detention or coerced confessions, for example — but because they are unconstitutional they cannot be used, no matter how effective.”
In a 198-page ruling, the judge said the “case is about whether the city has a policy or custom of violating the Constitution by making unlawful stops and conducting unlawful frisks… The city’s highest officials have turned a blind eye to the evidence that officers are conducting stops in a racially discriminatory manner.”