Back in November, when public sentiments for the NYPD further eroded following a summer of high-profile police-involved incidents around the country, the New York City Council proposed a bill that would add another layer of double-sided red tape for rank and file officers. Intro No. 541, or the Right to Know Law, proposes that officers ask a suspect’s permission whether they can be searched during a routine police stop, as per the Fourth Amendment. The consent must be documented via recording or written statement.

Twenty-four of the Council’s 51 members have backed the bill, including Bronx Council Members Andy King, Annabel Palma and Ritchie Torres. They’re the only Bronx legislators to publicly support the bill intended to curb the number of arrests where police officers demand suspects empty out their pockets. Torres has particularly advocated for the bill, arguing it secures a person’s constitutional right to privacy.

The law, if enacted, is triggered only if there is no reasonable suspicion, or probable cause, to be searched. It does not trump an officer’s right to a search during a stop, question and frisk encounter so long as that reasonable suspicion, which could range from just a hunch to their life being threatened, is established.

But in evaluating the premise of Right to Know, it seems a legal loophole is established, despite there being heavy legal justification under the Fourteenth Amendment. And it all comes down to reasonable suspicion, a broad legal standard subject to major interpretation and ambiguity. Police officers can work around the measure by swearing they had reasonable suspicion their life was in danger, which effectively trumps any law.

One simple example could be the routine stop. If a person is walking along the street and is asked by a police officer whether they will allow themselves to be searched, they can say no. But by denying an officer the right to be searched, it rises to a level where an officer can declare there was reasonable suspicion (i.e. unclear whether the alleged suspect is concealing a knife or small pistol) to frisk and search him. After all, anything can be a weapon. That exchange will likely hold in court, especially since it’s oftentimes an officer’s word against a suspect’s.

Still, one clear result from this measure could be the bureaucratization of any street stop, producing a chilling effect on police work. Should police be forced to record or get in writing a person’s consent to a search, it could force officers to second guess whether that stop will impose the headache of extra paperwork and scrutiny.

The bill was proposed before public opinion of the NYPD shifted to neutral after the fatal shootings of Brooklyn police officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos. Since then, the divisive rhetoric for extreme police reforms has leveled off, with many on the City Council wearing blue ribbons in support of police, a departure from when the Council seethed at the chance of changing the culture of policing last year.

Support for the law seems to be waning. In the first week of January, supporters of the bill told local media that more conversations are required on the bill. Reading between the lines, it seems even they may have been emotional when supporting this law in November.

Torres’ stance on the proposed bill runs counter to his former boss, and now colleague, Councilman James Vacca, representing the east Bronx. His coverage area, mainly Throggs Neck, Morris Park, and Pelham Parkway, is very favorable to police officers. In an interview, Vacca said the Council should not be “policing the police.”

Our prediction is the law will not pass, though just by a hair. Mayor Bill de Blasio, now trying to mend relationships with the NYPD, could likely veto the measure. But one conclusion could be a new wedge driven between City Council members wishing to progressively change NYPD tactics to preserve Constitutional rights and those looking to change it at a snail’s pace.

Editor’s Note: Letters to the editor are always encouraged. Please send them to David Cruz, Norwood News editor-in-chief at dcruz@norwoodnews.org. 

admin

Welcome to the Norwood News, a bi-weekly community newspaper that primarily serves the northwest Bronx communities of Norwood, Bedford Park, Fordham and University Heights. Through our Breaking Bronx blog, we focus on news and information for those neighborhoods, but aim to cover as much Bronx-related news as possible. Founded in 1988 by Mosholu Preservation Corporation, a not-for-profit affiliate of Montefiore Medical Center, the Norwood News began as a monthly and grew to a bi-weekly in 1994. In September 2003 the paper expanded to cover University Heights and now covers all the neighborhoods of Community District 7. The Norwood News exists to foster communication among citizens and organizations and to be a tool for neighborhood development efforts. The Norwood News runs the Bronx Youth Journalism Heard, a journalism training program for Bronx high school students. As you navigate this website, please let us know if you discover any glitches or if you have any suggestions. We’d love to hear from you. You can send e-mails to norwoodnews@norwoodnews.org or call us anytime (718) 324-4998.