Bloomberg files suit against city council to overturn stop and frisk legislation

New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg keeps insisting that the stop and frisk policy he instituted that was severely curtailed last month by the city council saves lives.

Yesterday, Bloomberg filed suit to overturn the law that makes it easier for citizens to sue the police for stop and frisk.

New York Daily News:

Mayor Bloomberg filed a lawsuit against City Council to overturn a law passed last month that would make it easier for people to sue after being targeted by the NYPD's controversial stop-and-frisk program.

In papers filed Tuesday in Manhattan Supreme Court, the mayor's Law Department says the law, passed over the mayor's veto last month, "exceeds the bounds of permissible legislation by the Council."

The law allows plaintiffs to sue for profiling in state court for injunctive relief only - which means a winning plaintiff could ask the court to mandate that the NYPD change its tactics, but could not ask for money. The law also expands the definition of profiling beyond race to include categories such as age, gender, sexual orientation and housing status.

Bloomberg's lawsuit says the state already puts "limits and obligations" on cops, and only the state legislature can change the criminal procedure law.

City Council's profiling law, which Speaker Christine Quinn opposed, was one of two measures aimed at curtailing stop-and-frisk passed 10 days ago over the mayor's veto.

The second law, which created an inspector general, is not targeted in Bloomberg's lawsuit.

When the law was passed, Bloomberg vowed to sue, saying "minority communities across our city" would suffer because there would be a rise in crime.

"The City Council adopted legislation that will make it harder for our police officers to protect New Yorkers and continue to drive down crime," he said.

 

I'm sure the city council feels all warm and fuzzy inside having handicapped the cops in this way. No doubt that street punks and thugs threw a party when the legislation passed.

As for New Yorkers, well, it's difficult for them to get a gun to protect themselves, and police response times being what they are, they might bleed out on the street before the cops came to the rescue.

But at least the perps would not have been profiled. And that's a helluva thing to put on the tombstone of an innocent victim.

New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg keeps insisting that the stop and frisk policy he instituted that was severely curtailed last month by the city council saves lives.

Yesterday, Bloomberg filed suit to overturn the law that makes it easier for citizens to sue the police for stop and frisk.

New York Daily News:

Mayor Bloomberg filed a lawsuit against City Council to overturn a law passed last month that would make it easier for people to sue after being targeted by the NYPD's controversial stop-and-frisk program.

In papers filed Tuesday in Manhattan Supreme Court, the mayor's Law Department says the law, passed over the mayor's veto last month, "exceeds the bounds of permissible legislation by the Council."

The law allows plaintiffs to sue for profiling in state court for injunctive relief only - which means a winning plaintiff could ask the court to mandate that the NYPD change its tactics, but could not ask for money. The law also expands the definition of profiling beyond race to include categories such as age, gender, sexual orientation and housing status.

Bloomberg's lawsuit says the state already puts "limits and obligations" on cops, and only the state legislature can change the criminal procedure law.

City Council's profiling law, which Speaker Christine Quinn opposed, was one of two measures aimed at curtailing stop-and-frisk passed 10 days ago over the mayor's veto.

The second law, which created an inspector general, is not targeted in Bloomberg's lawsuit.

When the law was passed, Bloomberg vowed to sue, saying "minority communities across our city" would suffer because there would be a rise in crime.

"The City Council adopted legislation that will make it harder for our police officers to protect New Yorkers and continue to drive down crime," he said.

 

I'm sure the city council feels all warm and fuzzy inside having handicapped the cops in this way. No doubt that street punks and thugs threw a party when the legislation passed.

As for New Yorkers, well, it's difficult for them to get a gun to protect themselves, and police response times being what they are, they might bleed out on the street before the cops came to the rescue.

But at least the perps would not have been profiled. And that's a helluva thing to put on the tombstone of an innocent victim.

RECENT VIDEOS