By Shriya Chittapuram
PHILADELPHIA, PA – The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Pennsylvania recently released a policy paper entitled “Wasted Resources: The failures of stop-and-frisk in Philadelphia,” a document that examines the misuse of stop-and-frisk in the city over the past 15 years.
According to the report, “Nearly 15 years after the ACLU of Pennsylvania, a professor from Penn Law School, and the law firm Kairys, Rudovsky, Messing, Feinberg & Lin LLP filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Philadelphia over its police department’s illegal and racist use of stop-and-frisk, the police tactic remains an area of great concern for civil libertarians.”
“In 2011, the city and the plaintiffs reached an agreement in Bailey v. City of Philadelphia that resulted in a consent decree that included an independent monitor of the city’s stop-and-frisk data,” added the ACLU.
That consent decree led to a citywide program that deprioritized the use of stop-and-frisk for minor offenses, which, claims the ACLU of Pennsylvania and other criminal legal reform advocates, is considered a success,” according to the report.
Mary Catherine Roper, civil rights attorney at Langer Grogan & Diver P.C. and former deputy legal director at the ACLU of Pennsylvania, said, “What this policy paper tells us is that stop-and-frisk has historically not offered a meaningful solution to violent crime. It also shows that stop-and-frisk has always been associated with racial disparities and racial targeting.
“There should be no discussion about increasing the use of this tactic until the Philadelphia police show that they can use it both legally and equitably. We urge city leadership to stop invoking this failed police tactic that impacts Black and brown Philadelphians as a political football.”
The previous report noted, “Data shows that city police officers are still stopping and frisking people without having reasonable suspicion of criminal activity or that the person is armed and dangerous.”
The ACLU Policy paper offers an in-depth analysis of the outcomes of the Bailey consent decree.
Solomon Furious Worlds, staff attorney at the ACLU of Pennsylvania, commented, “Calling out stop-and-frisk as the failed and racist policy that it is, is as important now as it was in 2010. That’s because the current mayoral administration’s rhetoric threatens to undo all the progress we’ve made since we filed the Bailey lawsuit.
“With community advocates engaged on this issue and pushing for something better, as well as the ongoing monitoring under the Bailey consent decree, we can hope to prevent the city from regressing back to failed policing tactics and begin to invest in the programs and services that truly make Philadelphians safe.”
According to the ACLU’s report, “One question about the future of the Bailey Consent Decree that remains is whether we will see progress in reducing racial disparities. If PPD leadership does not proactively seek to address racial disparities in officers’ use of stop-and-frisk, and all other tactics they employ, it will be difficult if not impossible to make further progress.”
