Floyd V. City Of New York Stop-And-Frisk Litigation
Floyd v. City of New York: Overview
Background:
The case was filed in 2008 by plaintiffs challenging the NYPD's stop-and-frisk practices, arguing they violated the Fourth Amendment (protection against unreasonable searches and seizures) and the Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection under the law) due to racial profiling and unconstitutional stops.
Stop-and-frisk:
A policing tactic where officers stop, question, and frisk pedestrians based on "reasonable suspicion" of criminal activity.
Allegations:
The NYPD stopped and frisked disproportionate numbers of Black and Latino individuals without reasonable suspicion.
The practice was unconstitutional and discriminatory.
Key Aspects of Floyd Case Litigation
Plaintiffs: Represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Legal Aid Society.
Defendant: City of New York and NYPD Commissioner.
District Court Decision (2013): Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled that the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk practice violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, particularly due to racial profiling.
Outcome:
The court ordered reforms including federal monitoring of the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk practices.
The case led to significant reductions in stop-and-frisk incidents and policy changes.
Related Cases and Developments
1. Ligon v. City of New York (2014)
Summary: A class-action lawsuit challenging the NYPD’s practice of conducting warrantless arrests following stop-and-frisk encounters, especially targeting Black and Latino communities.
Legal Issues:
Alleged unconstitutional arrests without probable cause after stops.
Continuation of racial profiling claims similar to Floyd.
Outcome:
Settled with the city agreeing to limit arrests following stops and improve officer training.
Significance:
Reinforced the need for constitutional safeguards beyond just stop-and-frisk, covering arrests.
2. Crawford v. City of New York (2017)
Summary: This case focused on NYPD’s surveillance of Muslims post-9/11, questioning the legality of intelligence gathering without individualized suspicion.
Legal Issues:
Violation of First and Fourth Amendments due to covert surveillance.
Connection to stop-and-frisk as part of broader NYPD tactics.
Outcome:
The court ruled parts of NYPD’s surveillance program unconstitutional.
NYPD agreed to changes in its intelligence operations.
Significance:
Highlighted intersections between stop-and-frisk and broader policing policies affecting civil liberties.
3. People v. De Bour (1982) (New York State Court of Appeals)
Summary: A key state precedent that outlines the levels of police intrusion and the corresponding legal standards required (reasonable suspicion, probable cause) during stops.
Legal Principles:
Defined the threshold for a valid stop and frisk in New York.
Officers need at least reasonable suspicion of criminal activity for a stop.
Frisk justified only if there is reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous.
Significance:
Provided the legal framework against which Floyd’s stop-and-frisk practices were judged.
The ruling emphasized the need for specific and articulable facts, not vague hunches.
4. Terry v. Ohio (1968) (U.S. Supreme Court)
Summary: The foundational U.S. Supreme Court case that established the legality of stop-and-frisk under the Fourth Amendment.
Legal Holding:
Police may stop and frisk a person if they have reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and reasonable belief that the person is armed and dangerous.
The stop must be limited in scope and duration.
Connection to Floyd:
Floyd case challenged how NYPD applied Terry standards, alleging violations due to widespread racial profiling and lack of individualized suspicion.
Significance:
Terry remains the constitutional baseline; Floyd case enforced stricter adherence.
5. Daniels v. City of New York (2003)
Summary: This class-action lawsuit challenged NYPD’s practice of wrongful arrests and false imprisonment stemming from stop-and-frisk tactics, particularly targeting minorities.
Legal Claims:
Violations of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Illegal detentions and arrests without probable cause.
Outcome:
Settled in 2010 with the City agreeing to pay over $7 million and reform certain police practices.
Significance:
Preceded Floyd and helped build the case against unconstitutional policing.
6. People v. De Bour (Continued Relevance)
Though decided in 1982, it remains a cornerstone for NYPD training and policy guidelines on stop-and-frisk.
Impact and Reforms Post-Floyd Litigation
Federal Monitoring: NYPD subject to court oversight to ensure compliance with constitutional policing.
Policy Changes: New protocols limiting stops without reasonable suspicion; improved data collection and transparency.
Training: Enhanced officer training to prevent racial profiling and unconstitutional stops.
Public Awareness: Litigation sparked broader conversations on racial bias and police accountability nationwide.
Summary Table
| Case | Jurisdiction | Focus | Outcome | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Floyd v. City of New York | SDNY (Federal) | Stop-and-frisk racial profiling | NYPD practice unconstitutional | Landmark ruling and reforms in policing |
| Ligon v. City of New York | SDNY (Federal) | Warrantless arrests after stops | Settlement and policy change | Expanded reforms on arrests and training |
| Crawford v. City of New York | SDNY (Federal) | Surveillance of Muslim communities | Program partially struck down | Limits on unconstitutional intelligence gathering |
| People v. De Bour | NY State Court | Legal standards for stop-and-frisk | Defined stop & frisk thresholds | Foundational legal framework for policing standards |
| Terry v. Ohio | U.S. Supreme Court | Constitutionality of stop-and-frisk | Established reasonable suspicion standard | Baseline for all stop-and-frisk litigation |
| Daniels v. City of New York | SDNY (Federal) | False arrests related to stop-and-frisk | Settlement with reforms | Early challenge to NYPD unconstitutional practices |
Conclusion
The Floyd v. City of New York litigation is a landmark case that exposed systemic racial profiling within NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policies and prompted major legal and policy reforms. Coupled with related cases like Ligon, Crawford, and foundational precedents such as Terry and De Bour, the case reshaped policing in New York and influenced national discussions about race, policing, and civil rights.
RELATED Blog
0 comments