"This is a historic and long overdue victory because what this court has confirmed today
is something that many New Yorkers, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of New Yorkers,
have known for many many years."
On the 12th August a US judge ruled that the New York Police Department's "stop-and-frisk"
program was unconstitutional because it targeted racially defined groups, all while the city's
highest officials "turned a blind eye".
This ruling is being seen as a massive victory for civil rights groups who have long argued
that the controversial program discriminates against the city's African American and Hispanic
populations.
And the fact that the judge who made this ruling was a federal one, i.e. one appointed
by the President, means that this case could have huge ramifications for similar "stop-and-frisk"
programs around the United States.
Between 2004 and 2012 more than 4.4 million stops were made on the streets of New York
City.
84% of these stops were made on African American and Hispanic citizens despite the fact that
these groups make up only 62% of the city's population as a whole.
And in 88% of this 4.4 million plus stops, no subsequent ticket was issued i.e. the police
found no reason to take further action.
But the shocking statistics don't end there.
A 2012 report by the New York Civil Liberties Union found that in 2011, the number of frisk
searches carried out on young black men was higher than the number of actual young black
men living in New York City altogether.
The report also found that only 1.8% of the African American and Hispanic people stopped
in 2011 had weapons on them, compared with 3.8% of the white people stopped.
But despite all this evidence for discrimination, the city's mayor, Michael Bloomberg, says
he will appeal the ruling.
"This is a very dangerous decision made by a judge that I think just does not understand
how policing works and what is compliant with the U.S. Constitution as determined by the
Supreme Court."
To be clear, Judge Shira Scheindlin's ruling doesn't mean that the practice of "stop-and-frisk"
is going to be banned in New York City, but what it did do is confirm that the NYPD's
program targeted people based on the colour of their skin and made it clear that this
was illegal.
To try and prevent this from happening in the future, Scheindlin has ordered several
measures to be taken, including a trial program where police officers in one precinct of each
of the city's five boroughs will be forced to wear body cameras in order to document
every single stop that they make.
The NYPD's practice of stopping, questioning and frisking - or "searching" as it's known
in the UK - goes back to the 1970s.
However, it's only supposed to be carried out by officers when they have reasonable
suspicion to believe that someone poses a danger, has committed a crime, or is preparing
to commit one.
And grounds for this reasonable suspicion do not include the colour of someone's skin.
"It is true that also we think it is probably a deterrent to kids for carrying a gun because
they know if they happen to be in an area where a crime was committed and they happen
to roughly fit the description - which is generally pretty broad - of the perpetrator,
they could be stopped and they don't want to have a gun in their hand."
Under Mayor Bloomberg the practice has expanded dramatically.
In 2002, the year Bloomberg first came into office, 97,296 stops were made.
By 2011, this number had risen to 700,000, that's a seven-fold increase.
And according to NYPD officer Pedro Serrano, under Bloomberg officers have been expected
to fill quotas that force them to make more stops than they would have otherwise.
But Bloomberg argues the "stop-and-frisk" program has contributed to a 30% reduction
in violent crime in the city since 2001.
Of course New York is not the ONLY place in the world where the practice of "stop-and-frisk"
is taking place, or where it is controversial.
In 2004 for example, the Metropolitan Police Authority in London found that the Met Police's
stop-and-search tactics were racist.
You can check out other videos we've made of controversial cases involving US police
on the left here and don't forget to subscribe.