A Steptoe blog about civil litigation in the Southern District of New York
The articles are here (NYT), here (NYLJ), and here (AP).
In the articles, Judge Scheindlin defends her work on the stop-and-frisk cases (which we covered extensively, see here). She called the Second Circuit’s decision to remove her from the cases an “intrafamily attack on judicial independence.”
As of today, Judge Scheindlin will be working
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…
The opinion’s introduction summarizes the holding as follows:
We hold that the police unions’ motions to intervene are untimely and do not assert an interest that the law seeks to protect. The unions knew, or should have known, of their alleged interests in these controversial and public cases well before they filed their motions in
…
In a 108-page opinion today, Judge Torres ruled that various police unions could not intervene to block or appeal the settlement of litigation concerning the police practice known as “stop-and-frisk.” New York City and the plaintiffs have agreed to settlement terms, but Judge Torres found that the unions raised their objections too late and that, in any event, the unions lacked sufficient interest in the merits that were distinct from the interests of the City:
Continue Reading Judge Torres Denies Police Unions’ Request to Intervene in Stop-and-Frisk Litigation
The Second Circuit issued two orders today concerning the removal of Judge Scheindlin from the stop-and-frisk litigation. In the first Order, the Second Circuit ruled that she lacked standing to intervene to seek to vacate the ruling removing her:
We know of no precedent suggesting that a district judge has standing before an appellate court to protest reassignment of a case. While a district judge may believe that he or she has expended a great deal of effort and energy on a case, only to see it reassigned, reassignment is not a legal injury to the district judge.
The Second Circuit panel that removed Judge Scheindlin from the stop-and-frisk case cited her “improper application of the Court’s ‘related case rule,’” without further explanation. In a motion filed late this evening asking the Second Circuit to vacate Judge Scheindlin’s orders, New York City argued that Judge Scheindlin violated the related case rule, which the…
In a motion today, Judge Scheindlin, represented by NYU Law professor Bert Neuborne, asked the Second Circuit for leave to file a motion to be restored to the stop-and-frisk case. The motion argues that Judge Scheindlin was “blind-sided” by the Second Circuit’s decision to remove her and that she should have had an opportunity to respond:
Continue Reading Judge Scheindlin Moves to Be Restored to Stop-and-Frisk Case
Judge Scheindlin issued a statement responding to the Second Circuit’s Order yesterday removing her from the stop-and-frisk cases. The statement in full reads:
Press Release I write to respond to the two issues cited by the appellate panel as the basis for removing me from the Floyd and Ligon cases. 1. On the related case
…
In ruling this morning, Judge Scheindlin ruled unconstitutional under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments the New York Police Department’s “stop-and-frisk” policing method. As we have reported on in the past, Judge Scheindlin conducted a bench trial of claims brought by a class of plaintiffs who alleged to have been unlawfully detained under the policy. In the 198-page liability opinion, Judge Scheindlin found that the NYPD’s stops of 4.4 million people from 2004 to 2012 – 80% of which were of black or Hispanic individuals and more than half of which led to a frisk – were done without legal basis in violation of the Fourth Amendment and were targeted to particular races in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Judge Scheindlin explained that her decision was not based on the effectiveness of the stop-and-frisk method.
Continue Reading Judge Scheindlin Rules “Stop-and-Frisk” Unconstitutional
