The Second Circuit strikes again.
In a new ruling on Friday, the three-judge federal appeals panel shot down motions from those on both sides of the stop-and-frisk argument.
On the one hand, the circuit court denied the city’s bid to have Judge Shira Scheindlin’s ruling thrown out. On the other, it squashed two motions from those representing Scheindlin to deny the city’s bid to vacate her decision on the merits, partly because the issue is now moot.
It’s notable the court also said it wanted to “address several characterizations of fact” advanced by Scheindlin’s allies. They were wrong to claim, the court said, that the panel had relied on “an inaccurate press report” as “the principal basis” for its decision to take Scheindlin off the case. The judges made clear they had in fact relied on court transcripts, which they referenced in open court.
The circuit panel pointedly leaves many things open. It leaves the city free to ask the court to consider the issue of bias on appeal, for example. And the panel has yet to rule on a request from the police union that it be granted standing to appeal Scheindlin’s ruling. That would mean the appeal could go on even if Bill de Blasio makes good on his promise to drop it.
We have no way of knowing what the court will do. In the meantime we will trade Mayor Bloomberg for Mayor de Blasio, who was elected handily in a free vote. However the court comes down, the new mayor will still have the power to impose all of Scheindlin’s policy on the police force if he so chooses.
It’s possible he will not so choose now that the ruling he hoped to hide behind has been called into question. But this is part of democracy, too. And to its credit, this court seems to be deciding in a way that should encourages judges not to act as if they were mayors, mayors not to hide behind judges — and citizens not to look to someone else to save them from the consequences of their own free votes.