NEW YORK - The Second Circuit Court of Appeals is considering a motion to delay changes to the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policy.
Three judges from the court heard more than two hours of testimony from eight different people regarding why the courts should or should not delay the changes to the policy that was ruled unconstitutional in August.
City attorney Celeste Koeleveld argued that the court needs more time to review the judge’s ruling due to the “chilling effect” within the department. She argues that officers are now confused about how to apply stop-and-frisk without violating people’s rights. She says that officers are now unable to use what she calls a very important law enforcement technique.
READ MORE: Brooklyn Crime Stories
Officials from the Center of Constitutional Rights say that there is no factual evidence to support any “chilling effect” since the August decision. The CCR says the NYPD should simply meet with the police reform monitor to discuss the changes to the policy. They say the request for a stay is a stall tactic.
The appeals court has now heard all testimony. Its decision could come this week or in several weeks.