Race, Age, Gender: What the NYPD Should Track During Stops and Why
The New York City Council last week required police officers to record the race, age and gender of most people they approach. That overrode Mayor Eric Adams' veto and introduced a law that supporters say will provide a more complete picture of who officers stop during investigations.
The law, known as the How Many Stops Act, is intended to improve police data collection efforts and prevent unlawful encounters with youth of color and other abuse.
Mr. Adams objects to a section of the legislation that requires officers to record their observations of residents they approach for law enforcement purposes, including asking a person to assist in locating a fleeing suspect or a missing person.
The mayor has said police will follow the law, which comes into effect in July. Here's a closer look at what it aims to achieve and how it could impact police and the public:
What does the law do?
The law requires officials to collect and share a wide range of information about low-level interactions with members of the public.
According to the police patrol guide, there are three levels of interaction that take place during “investigative encounters.”
Level 1 is requesting information from a person who is not a suspect. The individual is under no obligation to respond to such requests.
“The person may refuse to answer questions,” the patrol guide says, “or walk or even run away.”
Level 2 is when an officer begins to suspect that a person has committed a crime. Similar to a Level 1 interaction, the officer can ask what someone saw, their name and address, and where they are from. Officers can ask someone they consider a suspect to consent to a search. As with a Level 1 interaction, the person can walk away and refuse to answer questions.
Level 3 arrests occur when police have a stronger suspicion that someone has committed a crime. In such cases, the patrol guide says, an officer may use “reasonable force” to stop a person, ask “incriminating” questions and search the person “if the officer has reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and is dangerous'.
Police already have a federal obligation to collect and share detailed information about Level 3 stops. The new law requires them to provide similar information for Level 1 and Level 2 checks, including the reason for each investigation, demographics about the person being stopped and why the stop was made.
The information would be permanently stored and accessible to the public on the department's website.
The law does not require officers to keep detailed records of informal conversations, such as greeting people on the street or giving directions.
Why do supporters say it is necessary?
In 2013, a federal judge ruled that the police practice of stop and frisk people was unconstitutional and targeted people of color, particularly young black and Latino men and teenagers.
A supervisor was appointed to ensure the practice ended, but in June the supervisor reported that the department's anti-crime units were still unlawfully stopping too many people.
Supporters of the law also cited the department's history of underreporting and misclassification of arrests.
Jumaane Williams, the city's public advocate and sponsor of the legislation, said it would help “curb the abuse of stop, question and frisk.”
Many young people have complained of being approached by police as they walked through public housing projects or exiting the subway, making them feel like police viewed them as criminals, advocates of the law said. They are also unlikely to know that they are not required to stop under Level 1 or even Level 2 guidelines.
“When accurate data is available, we as policymakers are equipped with the information needed to craft and implement policy solutions,” Councilmember Yusef Salaam, chairman of the Public Safety Committee, said Tuesday.
Mr. Salaam, a newly elected councilor who was wrongly convicted in 1990 as a member of the Central Park Five, was stopped by a police officer last month while driving with his family. The officer let him go, but Mr Salaam said he had given a reason for the stop. The meeting, he said, showed why the new law was needed.
Supporters of the law say police could capture the newly needed data using the same smartphone app they already use it to log other encounters, and that shouldn't take more than 30 seconds. They said officers don't have to record the information right away; they can do it at the end of a shift or an investigation.
Why do the police and the mayor object?
Police say their main argument against the new law is the requirement that Level 1 interactions be recorded in detail. According to the police, the problem is that so many arrests take place in this category and that they take place under circumstances that are fluid and fast.
In 2022, officers recorded more than 3.2 million videos classified as Level 1 encounters, Michael Clarke, the department's legal director, told the City Council at a hearing last March.
Edward Caban, the police commissioner, cited the example of a missing person when reporters asked him about the legislation on Wednesday. Mr. Caban asked whether an officer should be expected to record demographics as critical seconds pass.
“What are you going to do?” he said. “Are you going to ask everyone you come into contact with?”
During the debate on the bill, police said released a three-minute video described as a 'simulation' conditions under the new law. The video showed a young female officer trying to help a mother find a missing child. The officer looks beleaguered and stressed as she records the details of all her encounters with witnesses and later, as she sits at her desk, trying to complete her paperwork, as a 911 call comes in.
Reporting the information after an investigation or service could result in excessive overtime payments, Commissioner Caban said.
By law, officials are not required to ask about a person's age, race, or gender; In general, they will have to record their answers based on observation. This approach to data collection is inherently flawed, John Chell, the head of the patrol that oversees the rank and file, said during an interview with reporters on Wednesday.
“When we talk about transparency, I don't understand what that means if I have to guess your race, gender and age,” he said.
What comes next?
Police have about five months to come up with rules and technology to put the law into practice.
Commissioner Caban said he understood public concerns about low-level officers' interactions with youth of color and said he was willing to “come to the table” with the City Council to reach a consensus on that issue.
Adrienne Adams, chair of the council, said there would be no changes to the law, but she and Mr Williams said they welcomed the opportunity to discuss how the law would be implemented.
Mr Salaam said the department would have “significant flexibility” in implementing the law.
“The NYPD has already found ways to conduct reporting without interfering with other duties, and there is no reason why the reporting required by this law cannot be done in the same way,” he said.