Circuit Rebuffs Scheindlin on Stop/Frisk

, New York Law Journal

   | 2 Comments

The Second Circuit said Southern District Judge Shira Scheindlin had given the "appearance of partiality" in her handling of 'Floyd v. City of New York,' and it stayed pending appeal Scheindlin's appointment of a monitor to reform NYPD stop-and-frisk policies and practices she had held unconstitutional.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisNexis® Here

Not a LexisNexis® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via lexis.com® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Kay

    Of course the plaintiffs' lawyers are disappointed by these orders. They stood to make millions from Judge Scheindlin, as did Scheindlin's hand-picked "monitor" and other chosen ones who would profit handsomely from a years-long takeover of the NYPD by Scheindlin. But instead of just expressing disappointment, the plaintiffs' lawyers resorted to surprisingly acerbic hyperbole, accusing the Circuit judges of improperly casting "aspersions" on Scheindlin, notwithstanding that Scheindlin's judicial code violations would be plain to a first year law student. Adherence to that code is essential to public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the federal courts, and to both lawyers' and litigants' need to believe they've been given a fair shake before a judge. Going on a public tear against the Second Circuit judges for doing their duty is unbecoming of counsel - and not smart.

  • DSK

    Sounds like reverse Judge shopping...

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202626031674

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.