Stop and Frisk Judge Removed From Case

Friday, November 01, 2013

Judge Shira Scheindlin has been taken off of the stop and frisk case after a federal appeals court found that she gave the appearance of impartiality. Jeffrey Toobin, staff writer for The New Yorker, CNN legal analyst and author of The Oath: the Obama White House and the Supreme Court, talks about the profile he wrote of Judge Scheindlin, as well as her remarks from the bench, which were cited in the appeals court's decision.


Jeffrey Toobin

Comments [19]


I do not think that "poor parenting and failing public schools" directly introduces youth into the criminal justice system. But those are 2 big societal problems nonetheless.

According to Bloomberg, schools are not the problem, but I do not believe he's accomplished all that he claims. Poor parenting is a systemic problem, and I'm ashamed that our society does so little to address it.

First, one must know what a "systemic problem" is. Poor parenting comes from kids raising kids, uneducated parents unable to educate their kids, and the parent's parents not being able to raise their children because they were not raised well themselves. This can be traced all the way back to slavery as well as systemic problems brought here from other countries by immigrants.

As a country, we never gave minorities a good footing to start off on, and we've just carried these problems from generation to generation for over a century. Scott, you can identify the problems, no doubt, but can you identify the solutions? I can't, but I can see that S&F is not one, no way.

Nov. 01 2013 12:13 PM


Do you think Stop and Frisk has more to do with introducing youg people into the criminal justice system than poor parenting and failing public schools? Just curious.

Nov. 01 2013 11:59 AM
Nick Lento from NJ

Toobin was wayyyyy too easy on the 2nd Circuit judges who made this despicable decision.

The decision must be appealed to the SCOTUS. If this decision is allowed to stand unchallenged it WILL indeed chill all speech by all judges.

If a judge knows that anything hey say on he public record can and will be used against them they have every incentive to NEVER talk to the press under any circumstances.

This was a POLITICAL decision not based on the actual merits of the case...but based on the POLITICAL power of the NYC police department.

The police are SO TERRIFIED of cameras that would be there to protect the US CONSTITUTION that they were willing to politically assassinate Scheindlin's free speech rights.

This is all about who is in charge in our nation, the constitution or the police.

If the new mayor simply "settles" this and this ruling is allowed to stand unchallenged it will sit there and the chilling effect will be institutionalized and judges throughout the nation will get the message that the police have absolute ultimate power over the judicial system and the constitution. We will have become a de facto police state.

Again, this decision MUST BE APPEALED on principle. If the SCOTUS upholds it then we need to work politically to get a new SCOTUS and change the constitution if necessary. Allowing the decision to stand by withdrawing the case is the equivalent of allowing the cops to rap he knuckles of the whole judicial system and forcing every judge to assume a submissive position in relation to the police.

Nov. 01 2013 10:47 AM
fuva from harlemworld has not been effective...

Nov. 01 2013 10:39 AM
fuva from harlemworld

Peckstiff, yours is the kind of informed, sophisticated analysis we need more of. Please, spread it around.

Nov. 01 2013 10:38 AM
Taher from Croton on Hudson

Hopefully a new mayor will challenge NYPD’s self-severing stop and frisk policy, and bring accountability to that the department.

Nov. 01 2013 10:37 AM

Stop & Frisk just indoctrinates young, minority men into the criminal justice system. Get stopped a few times, then going down to the precinct isn't such a big deal. After that, going to jail isn't such a bad thing. Stop & Frisk is grooming young men for a life behind bars. It may stop some shootings in the short term, but in the long term it creates a brand new and big class of felons. It's just not a mature approach to our problems.

Nov. 01 2013 10:34 AM
fuva from harlemworld

Jeffrey, not only do YOU not know the answer to the effect of SAF on the crime rate, NO ONE does, adequately.
Furthermore there is much evidence suggesting that it has not been...
People like the RETIRED DETECTIVE and other ignant police state types think that repeating fiction over and over again makes it true...
And they are COMPLETELY NONRESPONSIVE to your critical point about constitutionality overriding "effectiveness"...

Nov. 01 2013 10:34 AM

Re: the caller on the effectiveness of the PD procedure, hasn't there been a study cited in articles showing that gun buybacks are more cost effective?

Nov. 01 2013 10:31 AM
Roberrt from NYC

Well ex-cop people have still been getting killed on the street with stop and frisk and where do you get your information to prove that "thousands" of peoples' lives have been saved since stop and frisk.

Nov. 01 2013 10:29 AM
Amy from Manhattan

If the appeals court didn't have an actual basis for their decision, what does Mr. Toobin think was their motivation for removing Judge Scheindlin?

Nov. 01 2013 10:26 AM
fuva from harlemworld

The other political aspect: It makes the stop and frisk issue even more prominent in the mayoral race. Is the timing here really a coincidence?

Nov. 01 2013 10:25 AM

Impropriety is part of the everyday system according to Toobin.
(Hey, Jeffrey, questioning the ethics of the court? Are you still an admitted attorney?

Nov. 01 2013 10:25 AM
John P MacKenzie from Long Island City

Jeffrey, you say "she didn't need" to tell the lawyers about related. The point is that she did. She solicited the case gratuitously. That makes it worse.

Nov. 01 2013 10:24 AM
blacksocialist from BKbaby

john p - you reach as far as the ct of appeals... she sought to consolidate the cases because the nypd/city didnt want the cases to drag on for years. both parties sought to expedite the cases. the city was just angry that she ddint side with them... and the city, i.e. bloomie, put together a file on the judge, and when it was uncovered by the daily news they expressed anger.

Nov. 01 2013 10:19 AM
Robert from NYC

So the media reports it incorrectly AGAIN! So it ain't as it's been reported this morning.

Nov. 01 2013 10:17 AM

Solicited the case? How about the attorneys, private & public, who judge shop to get "favorable" hearings?

Nov. 01 2013 10:17 AM
john from office

Thank God!!

Nov. 01 2013 10:11 AM
John P MacKenzie from Long Island City

Judge Scheindlin, as the Court of Appeals plainly found, solicited the case, advised the lawyers to file it and said she'd consider it "related" to her other cases so that she could preside over this one. Why is that not disqualifying in itself? Isn't that a judge being the judge of her own cause? Isn't it clearly a matter creating the appearance, the strong appearance, of partiality?

Nov. 01 2013 10:08 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.