Saturday, June 26, 2021

Diaphragm bill found unconstitutional

From the NY Times:

In a victory for the city’s powerful police unions, a state Supreme Court judge struck down a city law banning police officers’ use of chokeholds and other physical restraints on Tuesday, saying the wording of the law was “unconstitutionally vague.”

The law, passed last summer, had been met with fierce resistance from police unions, who sued the city last fall over its passage. The language of the statute — which forbids officers from compressing a suspect’s diaphragm — was overly broad, the suit said, and made it nearly impossible for officers to physically engage suspects, even if the use of force was in good faith.

Justice Laurence L. Love agreed: “The phrase ‘compresses the diaphragm’ cannot be adequately defined as written,” he wrote in his ruling in State Supreme Court in Manhattan.

The judge encouraged the city to revise its law, and Mayor Bill de Blasio, at his daily news conference on Wednesday, urged lawmakers to move quickly to do so.


Let's hear it for Rory Lancman and company for not knowing how to pass a bill that doesn't violate the Constitution.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

The city council is a joke and it is good that the courts provide some sort of checks and balances.

Anonymous said...

Constitution? We don' need no stinkin' constitution.

We only need Donors! Everythin' else is window dressing for the gullible.

Anonymous said...

Police, don't choke people. Period.

Anonymous said...

Looks like the out of control NYPD can still do whatever they want without a problem. Above the law as usual.

Anonymous said...

and lachman wanted to be queens DA. lord help us if he won.

Unknown said...

"Looks like the out of control NYPD can still do whatever they want without a problem. Above the law as usual."

Huh? Chokeholds are against state law and have violated the NYPD patrol guide since 1993.

This Council bill was nothing more than performative nonsense.

Anonymous said...

Ever try to subdue anyone resisting arrest ? It's not easy Sheeple !

Anonymous said...

Dick Tracey said...
“You Can Beat the Rap, But You Can’t Beat the Ride”
A person is guilty of resisting arrest when he/she intentionally prevents a police officer or peace officer from effecting an authorized arrest of himself/herself or another person. Resisting arrest in NYC is a class A misdemeanor.

Anonymous said...

Funny how everyone that’s arrested is charged with resisting arrest.

Anonymous said...

Maybe if the cops didn't "forget" to turn on their body cameras, they'd have proof that the person was resisting arrest. The cameras are there to protect both sides.