A04615 Summary:

BILL NOA04615A
 
SAME ASSAME AS S01137-A
 
SPONSORBichotte (MS)
 
COSPNSRHeastie, Peoples-Stokes, Aubry, Gantt, Mosley, Gottfried, Blake, Walker, Cook, Perry, Pretlow, Ortiz, Dinowitz, Lifton, Hevesi, Rosenthal L, Reyes, Zebrowski, Barrett, Wright, Fernandez, Simon, Simotas, Dickens, Rozic, D'Urso, Barnwell, O'Donnell, Epstein, Colton, Jaffee, Richardson, Hunter, Rodriguez, Seawright, Glick, Williams, Taylor, Vanel, Otis, Niou, Arroyo, Bronson, Carroll, Crespo, Cruz, De La Rosa, DenDekker, Hyndman, Jacobson, McDonald, Nolan, Pichardo, Ramos, Steck, Thiele, Kim
 
MLTSPNSR
 
Add §837-u, Exec L
 
Prohibits police officers from using racial and ethnic profiling; requires that a procedure be established for the taking and review of complaints against police officers for racial and ethnic profiling; allows an action for injunctive relief and/or damages to be brought against a law enforcement agency, any agent of a law enforcement agency and the supervisor of an agent.
Go to top    

A04615 Actions:

BILL NOA04615A
 
02/04/2019referred to codes
04/30/2019reported
05/02/2019advanced to third reading cal.242
01/08/2020ordered to third reading cal.176
01/27/2020amended on third reading 4615a
06/08/2020passed assembly
06/08/2020delivered to senate
06/08/2020REFERRED TO RULES
Go to top

A04615 Committee Votes:

CODES Chair:Lentol DATE:04/30/2019AYE/NAY:13/7 Action: Favorable
LentolAyeRaNay
SchimmingerNayGiglioNay
PretlowAyeMontesanoNay
CookAyeMorinelloNay
CymbrowitzAyePalumboNay
O'DonnellExcusedGarbarinoNay
LavineAye
PerryAye
ZebrowskiExcused
AbinantiAye
WeprinAye
MosleyAye
HevesiAye
FahyAye
SeawrightAye
RosenthalAye

Go to top

A04615 Floor Votes:

DATE:06/08/2020Assembly Vote  YEA/NAY: 105/39
Yes
Abbate
Yes
Crespo
Yes
Galef
Yes
Lifton
Yes
Peoples-Stokes
No
Smith
Yes
Abinanti
No
Crouch
ER
Gantt
No
LiPetri
Yes
Perry
Yes
Smullen
Yes
Arroyo
Yes
Cruz
No
Garbarino
Yes
Lupardo
Yes
Pheffer Amato
Yes
Solages
Yes
Ashby
Yes
Cusick
No
Giglio
Yes
Magnarelli
Yes
Pichardo
No
Stec
Yes
Aubry
Yes
Cymbrowitz
Yes
Glick
No
Malliotakis
Yes
Pretlow
Yes
Steck
No
Barclay
Yes
Darling
No
Goodell
No
Manktelow
Yes
Quart
Yes
Stern
Yes
Barnwell
Yes
Davila
Yes
Gottfried
Yes
McDonald
No
Ra
Yes
Stirpe
Yes
Barrett
Yes
De La Rosa
Yes
Griffin
No
McDonough
Yes
Ramos
No
Tague
Yes
Barron
Yes
DenDekker
Yes
Gunther
Yes
McMahon
No
Reilly
Yes
Taylor
Yes
Benedetto
No
DeStefano
No
Hawley
No
Mikulin
Yes
Reyes
Yes
Thiele
Yes
Bichotte
Yes
Dickens
Yes
Hevesi
No
Miller B
Yes
Richardson
Yes
Vanel
Yes
Blake
Yes
Dilan
Yes
Hunter
Yes
Miller MG
Yes
Rivera
Yes
Walczyk
No
Blankenbush
Yes
Dinowitz
Yes
Hyndman
No
Miller ML
Yes
Rodriguez
Yes
Walker
No
Brabenec
No
DiPietro
Yes
Jacobson
No
Montesano
Yes
Rosenthal D
Yes
Wallace
Yes
Braunstein
Yes
D'Urso
Yes
Jaffee
No
Morinello
Yes
Rosenthal L
No
Walsh
Yes
Bronson
Yes
Eichenstein
Yes
Jean-Pierre
Yes
Mosley
Yes
Rozic
Yes
Weinstein
Yes
Buchwald
Yes
Englebright
No
Johns
Yes
Niou
Yes
Ryan
Yes
Weprin
Yes
Burke
Yes
Epstein
Yes
Jones
Yes
Nolan
No
Salka
Yes
Williams
Yes
Buttenschon
Yes
Fahy
Yes
Joyner
No
Norris
Yes
Santabarbara
No
Woerner
No
Byrne
Yes
Fall
Yes
Kim
Yes
O'Donnell
No
Sayegh
Yes
Wright
No
Byrnes
Yes
Fernandez
No
Kolb
Yes
Ortiz
ER
Schimminger
Yes
Zebrowski
Yes
Cahill
ER
Finch
No
Lalor
Yes
Otis
Yes
Schmitt
Yes
Mr. Speaker
Yes
Carroll
No
Fitzpatrick
Yes
Lavine
No
Palmesano
Yes
Seawright
Yes
Colton
No
Friend
No
Lawrence
No
Palumbo
Yes
Simon
Yes
Cook
Yes
Frontus
Yes
Lentol
Yes
Paulin
Yes
Simotas

‡ Indicates voting via videoconference
Go to top

A04615 Memo:

NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION
submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
 
BILL NUMBER: A4615A
 
SPONSOR: Bichotte (MS)
  TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the executive law, in relation to ethnic or racial profiling   PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL: The proposed legislation prohibits law enforcement officers from using racial and ethnic profiling establishes a collection of data on stops and creates a course of action based on racial or ethic profiling.   SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS: Section '1 would amend the executive law by creating a new section 837-t; Subdivision one would contain definitions. Subdivision two would prohibit law enforcement agencies and law enforce- ment officers from engaging in racial or ethnic profiling. Subdivision three would require every law enforcement agency to promul- gate and adopt an anti-racial profiling policy as well as procedures for reviewing complaints of racial or ethnic profiling. A copy of each complaint and a written summary of the disposition would be required to be forwarded to the division of criminal justice services. Subdivision four would require each law enforcement agency to collect and maintain data with respect to their civilian interactions while conducting routine and spontaneous investigatory activities. Subdivision five would require every law enforcement agency to compile the data collected and forward an annual report to the division of crim- inal justice services by March 1st of each year. Subdivision six would require the division of criminal justice services in consultation with the Attorney General to promulgate necessary forms for the police agencies to use in their data collection. Subdivision seven would require every law enforcement agency to make documents required by this bill available to the Attorney General upon notice and demand. Subdivision eight would require every law enforcement agency to provide all the collected data required by this proposal be made available to the division of criminal justice services. The division would then implement a computerized data system for public viewing of such data and would publish an annual report on law enforcement stops without reveal- ing the identity of any individuals. Subdivisions nine and ten would provide a right of action for injunctive relief and/or for damages to be brought by a private citizen who has been the victim of racial profiling or by the Attorney General on behalf of the people against a law enforcement agency that has engaged in racial or ethnic profiling. Subdivision eleven would establish that this section does not diminish or abrogate any other right, remedy or cause of action which an individual who has been the subject of racial profiling may have. Section 2 - contains the effective date.   JUSTIFICATION: The unconstitutional use of race or ethnicity as criteria has become the focus of many civil and human rights groups. The practice is commonly known as "racial profiling." Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, and other minority groups have long been victims of biased and unjustified stops by law enforcement officers. This consequently has had a corrosive effect on the relations between police and the minority communities and is of no benefit in reducing crime. In the first three quarters of 2016 (January - September), New Yorkers were stopped by the police 10,171 times. The demographics of those stopped were as follows: 54 percent were black (5,401), 29 percent were Latino (2,944), and 10 percent were white (1,042). Ultimately 76 percent of these stops (7,758) did not result in an arrest and the individual was innocent. These statistics show the racial bias inherent in police stops and this practice's ulti- mate ineffectiveness. The issue of racial profiling has gained national attention as courts have recently found law enforcement agencies to be engaging in unconsti- tutional practices. The Center for Constitutional Rights filed the federal class action lawsuit Floyd, et al. v. City of New York, et al. against the City of New York to challenge the New York Police Depart- merit's practices of racial profiling and unconstitutional stop and frisks of New York City residents. The named plaintiffs in the case David Floyd, David Ourlicht, Lalit Clarkson, and Deon Dennis - represent the thousands of primarily Black and Latino New Yorkers who have been stopped without any cause on the way to work or home from school, in front of their house, or just walking down the street. In a historic ruling on August 12, 2013, following a nine-week trial, a federal judge found the New York City Police Department liable for a pattern and prac- tice of racial profiling and unconstitutional stops. Under a new admin- istration, the City agreed to drop its appeal and begin the joint reme- dial process ordered by the court. The Floyd case stems from the landmark racial profiling case, Daniels, et al. v. City of New York, et al., which led to the disbanding of the infamous Street Crime Unit and a settlement with the City in 2003. The Daniels settlement agreement required the NYPD to maintain a written racial profiling policy that complies with the United States and New York State constitutions and to provide stop-and-frisk data to CCR on a quarterly basis from 2003 through 2007. Despite these significant cases, racial profiling is still a practice that is rampantly engaged in by law enforcement agencies across the state. In light of such circumstances, it has become paramount for New York to address the issue of racial profiling before it further contin- ues to undermine the collaborative relationship between communities of color and New York law enforcement officers. This legislation aims to resolve the problem by prohibiting police officers from using racial and ethnic profiling, b establishing policies and procedures to collect data on racial and ethnic profiling and by establishing a statewide public data base containing the collected data which will promote law enforce- ment integrity as well as to promote community support, particularly minority communities, for law enforcement officers.   PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: 2017-18: A04879; Passed Assembly 2015-2016: A 3949 Passed Assembly 2013-2014: A.2941 Passed Assembly 2011-2012; A.2288 Passed Assembly 2010: A.1676A Passed Assembly 2009 A.1676 Passed Assembly 2007 A.627 Passed Assembly 2005-06 A.2456A Passed Assembly 2003-04 A.11542 Passed Assembly   FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Related to the promulgation of regulations, the collection of data, the publishing of an annual report and the establishment of the public data base.   EFFECTIVE DATE: This act shall take effect immediately, with subdivision 4 taking effect in 90 days and subdivision 6 taking effect in 60.
Go to top

A04615 LFIN:

 NO LFIN
Go to top

A04615 Chamber Video/Transcript:

5-7-19Video (@ 00:24:30)Transcript pdf Transcript html
1-22-20Video (@ 00:49:54)Transcript pdf Transcript html
1-27-20Video (@ 00:04:21)Transcript pdf Transcript html
6-8-20Video (@ 02:34:47)Transcript pdf Transcript html
Go to top