In an order issued today, Judge Torres granted the motion of two police unions to participate in what Judge Torres described as “the difficult process of bringing the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policies and practices into compliance with federal and state law.” After having previously denied the unions’ motion to intervene in the case — a ruling that was upheld by the Second Circuit — Judge Torres agreed to permit the unions to provide their views to the Monitor appointed to oversee reforms. Judge Torres explained:
By letters dated March 4 and 6, 2015, the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association and the Sergeants Benevolent Association ask to participate in the reform process by presenting their views after the Monitor submits his Final Recommendations. The Court believes the unions’ “important perspective on these matters” should be heard earlier. By letter dated March 18, 2015, the City suggests a way for all five police unions to participate in the remedial process now. Under the City’s approach, the City will share proposals with the unions before providing them to the Monitor and the Plaintiffs. The unions may then offer their comments, which the City will convey to the Monitor. The City will continue to confer with the unions about substantial revisions proposed by the Monitor and the Plaintiffs. This approach affords the unions “a practical opportunity” to inform the Monitor of their viewpoints before the Monitor reaches conclusions and submits Final Recommendations to the Court.
Our prior coverage of this case can be found here.