Stop-and-frisk ruling halted by appeals court, judge removed from case

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

NEW YORK (PIX11) – The court mandated effort to reform the NYPD ‘s version of stop and frisk has been stopped in its tracks.

It took a stay – issued Thursday – from a federal appeals court to suspend the various departmental reforms laid out in judge Shira Scheindlin’s August ruling, citing her impartiality.

“Any fair person who listens to what the judge listened to would come up with the same verdict,” said Alfredo Carrasquillo.

The good news, says Alfredo Carrasquillo of Vocal NY, is the appellate court did not question the merits of Scheindlin’s decision.

“These stop-and-frisks are unconstitutional, they’re racist. They target young black and Latino youth, and it something needs to be done about it,” said Carrasquillo.

City Councilman Jumaane Williams – who helped spearhead the fight to change the NYPD’s tactics — says he is not discouraged.

“We have a commissioner and a mayor, and police unions who continue to move forward on something that everyone knows is wrong, has been ineffective, and is unconstitutional – except them,” said Williams.

But make no mistake. This latest ruling amounts to a major victory for the Bloomberg administration and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly.

“I don’t think it’s an issue for rank and file to take away anything. We want them to continue to do their job – doing the outstanding job that they’re doing, day in and day out,” said Kelly.

The appeals court not only suspended Judge Scheindlin’s recommended reforms – but took the extraordinary step of removing her from the case.

The appellate judges found Scheindlin breached the code of conduct for us judges by failing to appear impartial, and for quote, a series of interviews and public statements judge Scheindlin apparently made following her decision.

“I have always been – and certainly haven’t been alone, concerned about the partiality of judge Scheindlin. And we look forward to the examination of this case – a fair and impartial review of this case based on the merits,” said Kelly.