After a federal judge ruled that the NYPD’s use of stop-and-frisk was unconstitutional in 2013, and New York City elected its most liberal mayor in at least two decades the following year, the going theory has been that cops here would all but abandon the practice in favor of arresting lots of poor people—also known as “broken windows policing.” As it turns out, they’re still doing their fair share of stopping and frisking.
This revelation comes from Peter Zimroth, an attorney who was federally appointed to monitor the department after the ruling was handed down. Zimroth’s latest report to the court alleges that NYPD officers are still conducting themselves in much the same way as they were before the ruling. Nearly three years later, he writes, cops still don’t quite understand what they’re supposed to be doing. From the New York Daily News:
“Many police officers, including supervisors, are not well informed as yet about the changes underway or the reasons for them and, therefore, have yet to internalize them,” said monitor Peter Zimroth in court papers to Manhattan Federal Judge Analisa Torres.
“Many appear not to understand what is expected of them,” said Zimroth, who was appointed in August 2013 to oversee stop-and-frisk reforms.
In addition to his claim that unconstitutional stops have persisted at the department, Zimroth also alleges in the report that the department’s Civilian Complaint Review Board does not act on racial profiling complaints, the News notes.
Recently, the city made strides toward cutting back on the arresting-all-the-poor-people stuff as well, with a package of bills that would reduce some of the most common broken windows crimes to civil violations. If stop-and-frisk is any indication, NYPD officers will continue to arrest people for excessive noise and drinking in public anyway.