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.
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.
