"Stop and Frisk" unconstitutional

[Something completely different]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23672901

New York City's police department deliberately violated the civil rights of thousands through its stop and frisk policy, a US judge has ruled.

[Tiberius]

The article actually says it has been ruled "discriminatory", not unconstitutional. If it had been ruled unconstitutional, they would no longer be allowed to do it.

She [Judge Shira Scheindlin] did not order an end to the policy, but appointed an independent monitor to reform the practice.

[Minimalist]

To be clear, what the judge said is that the manner in which the NYPD has been utilizing Stop and Frisk violates the 4th and 14th Amendments.

The Supreme Court had upheld the procedure in 1968 under certain circumstances. The judge found that when 80% of 4 million stops target minorities those circumstances had been violated.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2...olicy.html

Mayor Bloomberg seems to think that the ends justifies the means. Would he then extend that to beating confessions out of suspects with a rubber hose?