The distinguished Napoli Shkolnik law firm, along with noted civil rights attorney Ben Crump, filed an action against New York City\u2019s Arlo Hotel, accusing it of sponsoring a controversial racial profiling incident which centered on a 14-year-old boy.<\/p>\n
Initially, a white woman accused the young man of stealing her smartphone<\/a>.<\/p>\n When he denied responsibility, the woman became violent and tackled him to the ground.<\/p>\n During this incident, a hotel employee demanded that he turn over his own phone in order to prove he didn\u2019t take hers. In other words, he was guilty until proven innocent.<\/p>\n Police officers soon broke up the melee, and the woman\u2019s missing phone turned up later in the back of an Uber vehicle.<\/p>\n \u201cThis happens to marginalized people of color all the time. We are falsely accused of stuff then we have to prove our innocence. It is assumed that we are guilty, it is assumed that the burden of proof is on us,\u201d Crump remarked.<\/p>\n Largely because of a landmark court opinion<\/a>, New York City\u2019s Human Rights Law is one of the broadest anti-discrimination laws in the country which features a private right of action.<\/p>\n This provision prohibits discrimination in public accommodations, including private hotels which are open to the public, based on:<\/p>\n Note that we said \u201cethnicity\u201d as opposed to \u201crace.\u201d We all belong to the same race, the human race. But we have different ethnicities.<\/p>\n The lack of a de minimis exception and unlimited punitive damages are two of the strongest features of the NYCHRL.<\/p>\n Police brutality claims are subject to the de minimis rule. These victims are ineligible for compensation unless they sustained serious physical injuries.<\/p>\n So, officers could be verbally and otherwise non-physically abusive, which brings up the subject of police disciplinary records.<\/p>\n In June 2020, New York lawmakers repealed<\/a> an obscure state law provision which kept all police discipline records confidential.<\/p>\n Such records could provide critical evidence in the aforementioned police brutality claims. Without corroborating evidence of misconduct, these claims often degenerate into \u201che said, she said\u201d affairs.<\/p>\n Police unions, primarily the Police Benevolent Association, fought the repeal at Albany and continued to fight it in court.<\/p>\n Ultimately, the public\u2019s right to know prevailed, and a federal judge ordered New York City and other jurisdictions to make these records public.<\/p>\n Almost a year after the repeal, that still hasn\u2019t happened. Officials have yet to release most of these records, since they did not technically include an admission or finding of guilt.<\/p>\n Supporting video and other evidence is also mostly unavailable.<\/p>\n Obviously, the fight for racial justice is not limited to courtrooms. That\u2019s why we advocate for these victims at the statehouse and in other forums as well.<\/p>\n A legal aphorism says, \u201cWhere there\u2019s a wrong, there\u2019s a remedy.\u201d We work to ensure that old saying is true in this context.<\/p>\n Roughly two dozen states still have police disciplinary record privacy laws which are similar to 50-a.<\/p>\nThe New York City Human Rights Law<\/h2>\n
\n
The Next Frontier: 50-a Police Discipline Records<\/h2>\n
Our Equality Guarantee<\/h2>\n