A district judge recently denied any motion by the NY’s five police unions to be seen as defendants in the controversial stop-and-frisk litigation.
The court ruling clears a major obstacle for the city in its plans to abandon its appeal and welcoming remedies, including an independently-operating monitor, to the stop-and-frisk order made by a previous judge last year.
The multi-page ruling that was released recently by Judge Analisa Torres shot down motions by police unions represented by officers, sergeants, captains, detectives, and other higher ranking officers to ask for case intervention.
Torres made the ruling saying that unions have no right to make an intervention since they made a motion filing years prior to the start of the litigation.
Last August, Judge Shira Scheindlin made a ruling that NYPD’s utilization of stop-and-frisk was deemed unconstitutional in ordering department changes. One of the appeals led to Scheindlin to be removed from the case later that October.
Torres allowed a separate motion which approved changes to Scheindlin’s remedies, which include a three-year monitor term.