In both cases, the city has argued that improved training is ensuring that the stop-and-frisk practices comply with the Fourth Amendment and the plaintiffs counter that training is inadequate and unconstitutional practices are still engrained in training materials and the mindset of patrolling officers.
The parties in both Ligon and Floyd are scheduled to submit on March 4 briefings on proposed remedies.
Among the remedies being considered by the judge are increased training, new training materials that accurately state the law on Fourth Amendment Terry stops, greater supervision and top-down accountability to make sure that police are in compliance. Scheindlin also raised the prospect of a court monitor to help ensure compliance.
Christopher Dunn of the New York Civil Liberties Union said yesterday, "Certifying the class was correct and necessary given that the unconstitutional stopping and frisking we challenge is endemic to the Clean Halls program. We now look forward to Judge Scheindlin ordering the systemic relief needed to fix the program."
On Feb. 11, Scheindlin held that consideration of any remedies in Ligon and Floyd will be independent of any remedy in Davis v. City of New York, 10-cv-699. Class certification is pending in Davis, a case where plaintiffs allege persistent Fourth Amendment violations by police in the buildings and on the property of the New York City Housing Authority.
The parties in Davis are awaiting a decision on their motions for summary judgment, with briefing on the issue of class certification on hold until Scheindlin makes her decision.
Mark Zuckerman, senior counsel in the federal division of the Law Department, said in a statement, "We respectfully disagree with the decision. We don't believe that class certification is warranted, but it's only one step in the broader litigation."
@|Mark Hamblett can be contacted at mhamblett@alm.com.
Subscribe to New York Law Journal
