BILL NUMBER: S1350
SPONSOR: CLEARE
 
TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the executive law, in relation to bias-based profiling
 
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:
The proposed legislation prohibits law enforcement officers from using
racial, ethnic, or other bias-based profiling; establishes a collection
of data on stops; and creates a course of action based on bias-based
profiling.
 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
Section 1 would amend the executive law by creating a new section
837-y; Subdivision one would contain definitions. Subdivision two would
prohibit law enforcement agencies and law enforcement officers from
engaging in racial or ethnic profiling. Subdivision three would require
every law enforcement agency to promulgate and adopt an anti-bias-based-
profiling policy as well as procedures for reviewing complaints of bias-
based profiling. A copy of each complaint and a written summary of the
disposition would be required to be forwarded to the division of crimi-
nal justice services.
Subdivision four would require each law enforcement agency to collect
and maintain data with respect to their reportable encounters Subdivi-
sion five would require every law enforcement agency to compile the data
collected and forward an annual report to the division of criminal
justice services by March 1st of each year. Subdivision six would
require the division of criminal justice services in consultation with
the Attorney General to promulgate necessary forms for the police agen-
cies to use in their data collection. Subdivision seven would require
every law enforcement agency to make documents required by this bill
available to the Attorney General upon notice and demand.
Subdivisions eight and nine would provide a right of action for injunc-
tive relief and/or for damages to be brought by a private citizen who
has been the victim of racial profiling or by the Attorney General on
behalf of the people against a law enforcement agency that has engaged
in racial or ethnic profiling. Subdivision eleven would establish that
this section does not diminish or abrogate any other right, remedy or
cause of action which an individual who has been the subject of racial
profiling may have. Subdivision ten states nothing in this section
shall diminish or abrogate any right, remedy, or cause of action. Subdi-
vision eleven establishes the reporting requirements. Subdivision twelve
establishes that no later than 180 days from the effective date the
subdivi- sion shall adopt regulations for collecting and reporting the
data.
Subdivision thirteen establishes that any local legislative body may
adopt additional duties and requirements. Section 2 - contains the
effective date.
 
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND AMENDED VERSION (IF APPLICABLE):
Changed the term "racial or ethnic profiling" to "bias-based profiling",
to more fully encompass and prevent class-based profiling.
 
JUSTIFICATION:
The unconstitutional use of race or ethnicity as criteria has become the
focus of many civil and human rights groups. The practice is commonly
known as "racial profiling." Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, and other
minority groups have long been victims of biased and unjustified stops
by law enforcement officers. This consequently has had a corrosive
effect on the relations between police and the minority communities and
is of no benefit in reducing crime. In the first three quarters of 2016
(January - September), New Yorkers were stopped by the police 10,171
times. The demographics of those stopped were as follows: 54 percent
were black (5;401), 29 percent were Latino (2,944), and 10 percent were
white (1,042). Ultimately 76 percent of these stops (7,758) did not
result in an arrest and the individual was innocent. These statistics
show the racial bias inherent in police stops and this practice's ulti-
mate ineffectiveness. This bill expands the traditional definition of
racial and ethnic profiling to extend the same protections against bias-
based profiling to members of other minority communities that are faced
with bias-based profiling based on attributes other than race or ethnic-
ity. The issue of racial profiling has gained national attention as
courts have recently found law enforcement agencies to be engaging in
unconstitutional practices. The Center for Constitutional Rights filed
the federal class action lawsuit Floyd, et al. v. City of New York, et
al. against the City of New York to challenge the New York Police
Department's practices of racial profiling and unconstitutional stop and
frisks of New York City residents. The named plaintiffs in the case
David Floyd, David Ourlicht, Lalit Clarkson, and Deon Dennis represent
the thousands of primarily Black and Latino New Yorkers who have been
stopped without any cause on the way to work or home from school, in
front of their house, or just walking down the street. In a historic
ruling on August 12, 2013, following a nine-week trial, a federal judge
found the New York City Police Department liable for a pattern and prac-
tice of racial profiling and unconstitutional stops. Under a new admin-
istration, the City agreed to 'drop its appeal and begin the joint reme-
dial process ordered by the court. The Floyd case stems from the
landmark racial profiling case, Daniels, at al. v. City of New York, et
al., which led to the disbanding of the infamous Street Crime Unit and a
settlement with the City in 200 3. The Daniel s settlement agreement
required the NYPD to maintain a written racial profiling policy that
complies with the United States and New York State constitutions and to
provide stop-and frisk data to CCR on a quarterly basis from 2003
through 2007. Despite these significant cases, racial profiling is still
a practice that is rampantly engaged in by law enforcement agencies
across the state. In light of such circumstances, it has become para-
mount for New York to address the issue of racial profiling before it
further continues to undermine the collaborative relationship between
communities of color and New York law enforcement officers. This legis-
lation aims to resolve the problem by prohibiting police officers from
using racial and ethnic profiling, b establishing policies and proce-
dures to collect data on racial and ethnic profiling and by establishing
a statewide public data base containing the collected data which will
promote law enforcement integrity as well as to promote community
support, particularly minority communities, for law enforcement offi-
cers.
 
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
Previously Introduced.
 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Related to the promulgation of regulations, the collection of data, the
publishing of an annual report and the establishment of the public data
base.
 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately