Stop-and-Frisk Attorneys Ask Court to Investigate NYPD's Social-Distancing Enforcement
Today, the attorneys behind two of the three landmark class action lawsuits that challenged the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk and trespass enforcement practices as racially discriminatory and unconstitutional (Floyd v. City of New York and Davis v. City of New York) filed a motion against the City of New York asking the court to direct Peter Zimroth, the court-appointed monitor in the stop-and-frisk cases, to conduct an investigation into the NYPD’s social-distancing enforcement practices and report his findings to the parties, the court, and the public, as reported by POLITICO.
The Center for Constitutional Rights, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), the Legal Aid Society, and the law firm of Beldock, Levine, & Hoffman also asked the Southern District of New York District Court to direct Zimroth to impose a temporary moratorium on the NYPD’s enforcement of social-distancing rules pending the outcome of his investigation, and provide the plaintiffs with documents, data, and information concerning the NYPD’s social-distancing enforcement practices, which they requested from the City last month.
“Race is determining whether your encounter ends in [a cop] handing you a mask or handing you a summons,” said Corey Stoughton, Attorney-in-Charge of the Special Litigation Unit with the Criminal Defense Practice at The Legal Aid Society. “The NYPD fails to take racial discrimination sufficiently seriously, and fails to create a sufficient system of accountability to replace this conduct.”