Why Can’t We Talk About the Murder Wave?

[ipatent]

In 2013, US District Court Judge Shira Scheindlin found that New York's stop-and-frisk strategy focused too heavily on black and Hispanic people and was carried out too often without reasonable suspicion.

As a result, she ruled that New York's stop-and-frisk policy was unconstitutional "as applied." Scheindlin specifically said she was not ordering New York to end stop-and-frisk, but instead, she ordered the city's police to reform their training and policing procedures to, among other things, make sure that officers do not engage in racial profiling when determine who to stop. She also appointed a monitor to oversee how the department was carrying out her orders.

Scheindlin's ruling was highly controversial. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals halted enforcement of the reforms she had ordered and returned the case to a lower court for further review. The appeals court also took unusual step of removing her from the case.

But the appellate court did not overturn her ruling that the way the city was carrying out stop-and-frisk was unconstitutional, since it violated Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure.

It is also true that the way stop-and-frisk was carried out in New York -- tactics that Giuliani touted as helping to "change New York City from the crime capital of America to the safest large city in the country" -- is still considered illegal.

"As applied," try again.

 

[ipatent]

But scientifically categorised through their generic limitations. I get you.

Only for the purpose of explaining disparate outcomes.

 

[Tony Stark]

"As applied"

Exactly,which is why I previously said stop and frisk all races equally.

Stop-and-frisk is unconstitutional if its only done to black and brown people.

 

[ipatent]

Exactly,which is why I previously said stop and frisk all races equally.

You don't understand the law of constitutional review.

 

[Bugenhagen]

Only for the purpose of explaining disparate outcomes.

Sure that's the purpose.

Boring racists arise on ET fairly regularly and sooner or later I say their real name. They disappear, poof.

 

[Tony Stark]

You don't understand the law of constitutional review.

You don't understand the constitution and the law period.There is no stop and frisk the way you suggested because 2 Federal Courts ruled it unconstitutional.

 

[ipatent]

You don't understand the constitution and the law period.There is no stop and frisk the way you suggested because 2 Federal Courts ruled it unconstitutional.

Terry v. Ohio is still the Supreme Court law. Eric Adams is bringing back a modified form of stop & frisk in NYC.

 

[gwb-trading]

You don't understand the constitution and the law period.There is no stop and frisk the way you suggested because 2 Federal Courts ruled it unconstitutional.

I suggest you go read the Terry vs. Ohio 392 US 1 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court which stated stop and frisk is completely constitutional.

 

[Tony Stark]

I suggest you go read the Terry vs. Ohio 392 US 1 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court which stated stop and frisk is completely constitutional.

Not as NYP applied it and iPatent suggested it.

 

[Tony Stark]

Terry v. Ohio is still the Supreme Court law.

It is,but it cant be applied only to 90% black and brown people.