Notes:
•Supreme Court’s interpretation of that provision gives the police frighteningly wide discretion to follow, stop, question, frisk and employ excessive force against African-Americans and Latinos who have shown virtually no indication of wrongdoing
•The officer would be free to chase someone even if he had no reason to believe that they had violated any law
• Officers could argue that a man “looked Mexican,” and therefore believed that he was undocumented and could stop him
•Officers could stop and frisk these individuals for weapons based on the officer’s “reasonable suspicion”
•Supreme Court has made clear that simply being in a “high crime” (which often means a predominantly black or Latino) area can be a factor in determining whether a person is armed and dangerous
•The victory leaves in place a higher body of law, Supreme Court doctrine, that continues to expose African-Americans and Latinos to surveillance, harassment, violence and death
•stop-and-frisk practices of the New York Police Department violate the Constitution
•ruling by Judge Scheindlin, of the Federal District Court in Manhattan, does nothing to disrupt the authority the Supreme Court has given police officers to target African-Americans and Latinos with little or no basis
•the Supreme Court has held that people do not have a right to know that they can say no to an officer’s request to conduct a search
No comments:
Post a Comment