Stop-and-Frisk Ruling: Lines That We Want on T-Shirts

A judge said the practice was unconstitutional. And she said it well. Here are the highlights. 

(The Root) — In a decision today, a federal court deemed the New York City Police Department’s use of its stop-and-frisk tactic “indirect racial profiling” that allowed police officers to unfairly target blacks and Hispanics far more than whites. More to the point: U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin said it was unconstitutional, accused city officials of turning a blind eye and ordered major fixes and oversight.

And she said it well. Here are some of the highlights you won’t want to miss — and might even find yourself repeating — from her takedown of the deeply flawed crime-fighting tactic.

The basic disparity:

The New York City Police Department (“NYPD”) made 4.4 million stops between January 2004 and June 2012. Over 80% of these 4.4 million stops were of blacks or Hispanics. 

Which, of couse, has a human side: 

In each of these stops a person’s life was interrupted.

Here’s how stop and frisk as currently used is a disaster for black and brown people:

First, as reflected in Dr. Fagan’s Table 5, the NYPD carries out more stops in areas with more black and Hispanic residents, even when other relevant variables are held constant …

Here’s another way: