A federal judge has rejected a settlement of lawsuits charging that the New York City police department illegally targeted Muslims for surveillance, saying the deal did not go far enough and provide sufficient protections.
U.S. District Judge Charles Haight in Manhattan in a ruling made public on Monday rejected a deal announced in January in which the New York Police Department would install a civilian representative to help monitor its counterterrorism efforts.
Haight said the civilian representative’s proposed powers “do not furnish sufficient protection from potential violations of the constitutional rights for Muslims and believers in Islam who live, move and have their being in the City.”
He cited an inspector general’s report as indicating the department has a “systemic inclination” to disregard court-approved regulations, called the Handschu guidelines, that limit how it can monitor political and religious activity.
Haight suggested a series of alterations, including clarifying the authority of the civilian representative to ensure the NYPD’s compliance with the Handschu guidelines and requiring that the representative report periodically to the court.
The New York Civil Liberties Union, which represented the plaintiffs, said in a statement the ruling highlighted safeguards they sought but that the department declined to accept.
“This development is an opportunity to put the strongest safeguards in place, and we are eager to discuss the court’s suggestions with the NYPD and the city,” the group said.
The NYPD did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the department pursued an aggressive surveillance program that sent undercover officers into Muslim neighborhoods, organizations and mosques.
The tactics, which became widely known after a series of reports by the Associated Press, were criticized by civil rights advocates as unconstitutional.
Mayor Bill de Blasio, who campaigned in part on reining in police excesses, ended the program soon after taking office in 2014.
The proposed settlement required modifications to the Handschu guidelines, which were loosened after the Sept. 11 attacks, and called for at least a five-year term for the civilian representative.
(Reporting by Nate Raymond in New York; Editing by Steve Orlofsky)
So long, Steve King: 9-term white supremacist GOP congressman from Iowa loses primary
U.S. Congressman Steve King, nine-term Republican of Iowa, has just lost his primary to a GOP challenger. It’s a huge fall from grace: In 2014 The Des Moines Register labeled the former earth-moving company founder a “presidential kingmaker.”
But his racist, white nationalist, white supremacist, anti-immigrant, anti-Semitic, homophobic, transphobic, biphobic remarks and disturbing ties to far right radical European politicians – including one he endorsed who has ties to a neo-Nazi, finally caught up with him.
When the president’s son-in-law truly was a great success
For many Americans, the idea of the president tasking his son-in-law with solving national, even international, crises, seems problematic, if not absurd. But it happened once before and turned out to be the kind of “great success story” our current first family wants us to believe in again. Slightly over a century ago, as the US mobilized for the First World War, the nation faced devastating breakdowns of its financial and transport systems. In response, President Woodrow Wilson leaned heavily on his talented and experienced Treasury Secretary, William McAdoo, who just happened to be his son-in-law. Looking back at this episode tells us a lot about what makes for successful emergency management at the highest levels of government.
Here are 7 ways Donald Trump is just like Henry Ford — and why that’s not good for American democracy
On May 21, speaking at the Ford Motor Company’s Rawsonville plant in Ypsilanti, Michigan, Donald Trump paid his latest homage to Henry Ford, lauding the family’s “good bloodlines” with Ford’s great grandson sitting in the front row.
Ford, like Trump, was obsessed with bloodlines—with the idea that race and genetic origins determined who counted as the “best people.”