NY State Senate Bill 2023-S5093B

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Senate Committee Codes Committee

Introduced
- In Committee Assembly
- In Committee Senate
- On Floor Calendar Assembly
- On Floor Calendar Senate
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
Delivered to Governor
Signed By Governor

Please enter your contact information

First Name

Last Name

Email Address

A valid email address is required.

Home address is used to determine the senate district in which you reside. Your support or opposition to this bill is then shared immediately with the senator who represents you.

Optional services from the NY State Senate:

Create an account. An account allows you to officially support or oppose key legislation, sign petitions with a single click, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Include a custom message for your Senator? (Optional)

Enter a message to your senator. Many New Yorkers use this to share the reasoning behind their support or opposition to the bill. Others might share a personal anecdote about how the bill would affect them or people they care about.

Actions

View Actions

Date of Action	Assembly Actions - Lowercase Senate Actions - UPPERCASE
Mar 13, 2024	print number 5093b
Mar 13, 2024	amend and recommit to codes
Jan 04, 2024	print number 5093a
Jan 04, 2024	amend (t) and recommit to codes
Jan 03, 2024	referred to codes
Feb 22, 2023	referred to codes

Bill Amendments

Original

B (Active)

2023-S5093 - Details

See Assembly Version of this Bill:: A3978
Current Committee:: Senate Codes
Law Section:: Executive Law
Laws Affected:: Add §837-y, Exec L
Versions Introduced in Other Legislative Sessions:: 2009-2010: A1676
2011-2012: A2288
2013-2014: A2941
2015-2016: A3949
2017-2018: S6555, A4879
2019-2020: S1137, A4615
2021-2022: S583, S8121, A2662
2025-2026: S1350, A3475

2023-S5093 - Summary

Prohibits police officers from using bias-based profiling; requires that a procedure be established for the taking and review of complaints against police officers for bias-based profiling; allows an action for injunctive relief and/or damages to be brought against a law enforcement agency, any agent of a law enforcement agency and the supervisor of an agent.

2023-S5093 - Sponsor Memo

                                 
BILL NUMBER: S5093

SPONSOR: CLEARE
 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the executive law, in relation to ethnic or racial
profiling

 
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:

The proposed legislation prohibits law enforcement officers from using
racial and ethnic profiling establishes a collection of data on stops
and creates a course of action based on racial or ethic profiling.

 
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:

Section 1 would amend the executive law by creating a new section 837-t;
Subdivision one would contain definitions.

Subdivision two would prohibit law enforcement agencies and law enforce-
ment officers from engaging in racial or ethnic profiling.

Subdivision three would require every law enforcement agency to promul-
gate and adopt an anti-racial profiling policy as well as procedures for
reviewing complaints of racial or ethnic profiling. A copy of each
complaint and a written summary of the disposition would be required to
be forwarded to the division of criminal justice services.

Subdivision four would require each law enforcement agency to collect
and maintain data with respect to their civilian interactions while
conducting routine and spontaneous investigatory activities.

Subdivision five would require every law enforcement agency to compile
the data collected and forward an annual report to the division of crim-
inal justice services by March 1st of each year.

Subdivision six would require the division of criminal justice services
in consultation with the Attorney General to promulgate necessary forms
for the police agencies to use in their data collection.

Subdivision seven would require every law enforcement agency to make
documents required by this bill available to the Attorney General upon
notice and demand.

Subdivision eight would require every law enforcement agency to provide
all the collected data required by this proposal be made available to
the division of criminal justice services. The division would then
implement a computerized data system for public viewing of such data and
would publish an annual report on law enforcement stops without reveal-
ing the identity of any individuals.

Subdivisions nine and ten would provide a right of action for injunctive
relief and/or for damages to be brought by a private citizen who has
been the victim of racial profiling or by the Attorney General on behalf
of the people against a law enforcement agency that has engaged in
racial or ethnic profiling.



Subdivision eleven would establish that this section does not diminish
or abrogate any other right, remedy or cause of action which an individ-
ual who has been the subject of racial profiling may have.

Section 2 - contains the effective date.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

The unconstitutional use of race or ethnicity as criteria has become the
focus of many civil and human rights groups. The practice is commonly
known as "racial profiling." Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, and other
minority groups have long been victims of biased and unjustified stops
by law enforcement officers. This consequently has had a corrosive
effect on the relations between police and the minority communities and
is of no benefit in reducing crime. In the first three quarters of 2016
(January - September), New Yorkers were stopped by the police 10,171
times. The demographics of those stopped were as follows: 54 percent
were black (5,401), 29 percent were Latino (2,944), and 10 percent were
white (1,042). Ultimately 76 percent of these stops (7,758) did not
result in an arrest and the individual was innocent. These statistics
show the racial bias inherent in police stops and this practice's ulti-
mate ineffectiveness.

The issue of racial profiling has gained national attention as courts
have recently found law enforcement agencies to be engaging in unconsti-
tutional practices. The Center for Constitutional Rights filed the
federal class action lawsuit Floyd, et al. v. City of New York, et al.
against the City of New York to challenge the New York Police Depart-
ment's practices of racial profiling and unconstitutional stop and
frisks of New York City residents. The named plaintiffs in the case
David Floyd, David Ourlicht, Lalit Clarkson, and Deon Dennis - represent
the thousands of primarily Black and Latino New Yorkers who have been
stopped without any cause on the way to work or home from school, in
front of their house, or just walking down the street. In a historic
ruling on August 12, 2013, following a nine-week trial, a federal judge
found the New York City Police Department liable for a pattern and prac-
tice of racial profiling and unconstitutional stops. Under a new admin-
istration, the City agreed to drop its appeal and begin the joint reme-
dial process ordered by the court.

The Floyd case stems from the landmark racial profiling case, Daniels,
at al. v. City of New York, et al., which led to the disbanding of the
infamous Street Crime Unit and a settlement with the City in 2003. The
Daniels settlement agreement required the NYPD to maintain a written
racial profiling policy that complies with the United States and New
York State constitutions and to provide stop-and-frisk data to CCR on a
quarterly basis from 2003 through 2007. Despite these significant cases,
racial profiling is still a practice that is rampantly engaged in by law
enforcement agencies across the state. In light of such circumstances,
it has become paramount for New York to address the issue of racial
profiling before it further continues to undermine the collaborative
relationship between communities of color and New York law enforcement
officers. This legislation aims to resolve the problem by prohibiting
police officers from using racial and ethnic profiling, b establishing
policies and procedures to collect data on racial and ethnic profiling
and by establishing a statewide public data base containing the
collected data which will promote law enforcement integ- rity as well as

to promote community support, particularly minority communities, for law
enforcement officers.

 
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

2019-20: A4615-A; Passed assembly

2017-18: A4879; Referred to Rules

2015-2016: A 3949 Passed Assembly

2013-2014: A.2941 Passed Assembly

2011-2012; A.2288 Passed Assembly

2010: A.1676A Passed Assembly

2009 A.1676 Passed Assembly

2007 A.627 Passed Assembly

2005-06 A.2456A Passed Assembly

2003-04 A.11542 Passed Assembly

 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Related to the promulgation of regulations, the collection of data, the
publishing of an annual report and the establishment of the public data
base.

 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately, with subdivision 4 taking effect
in 90 days and subdivision 6 taking effect in 60.

2023-S5093 - Bill Text download pdf

                             
                     S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                   5093
 
                        2023-2024 Regular Sessions
 
                             I N  S E N A T E
 
                             February 22, 2023
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by  Sen.  CLEARE -- read twice and ordered printed, and when
   printed to be committed to the Committee on Codes
 
 AN ACT to amend the executive law,  in  relation  to  ethnic  or  racial
   profiling
 
   THE  PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
 BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

   Section 1. The executive law is amended by adding a new section  837-x
 to read as follows:
   §  837-X.  ETHNIC  AND  RACIAL  PROFILING. 1. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS
 SECTION:
   (A) "LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY" MEANS AN AGENCY ESTABLISHED BY THE  STATE
 OR  A  UNIT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENGAGED IN THE PREVENTION, DETECTION, OR
 INVESTIGATION OF VIOLATIONS OF CRIMINAL LAW.
   (B) "LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER" MEANS A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER,
 AS DEFINED IN SUBDIVISIONS THIRTY-THREE AND THIRTY-FOUR OF SECTION  1.20
 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW, EMPLOYED BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
   (C)  "RACIAL OR ETHNIC PROFILING" MEANS THE PRACTICE OF A LAW ENFORCE-
 MENT AGENT OR AGENCY, RELYING, TO ANY DEGREE,  ON  ACTUAL  OR  PERCEIVED
 RACE,  COLOR,  ETHNICITY, NATIONAL ORIGIN OR RELIGION IN SELECTING WHICH
 INDIVIDUAL OR LOCATION TO SUBJECT TO ROUTINE OR SPONTANEOUS INVESTIGATO-
 RY ACTIVITIES OR IN  DECIDING  UPON  THE  SCOPE  AND  SUBSTANCE  OF  LAW
 ENFORCEMENT  ACTIVITY  FOLLOWING  THE  INITIAL  INVESTIGATORY PROCEDURE,
 EXCEPT WHEN THERE IS TRUSTWORTHY INFORMATION, RELEVANT TO  THE  LOCALITY
 AND  TIMEFRAME,  THAT LINKS A SPECIFIC PERSON OR LOCATION WITH A PARTIC-
 ULAR CHARACTERISTIC DESCRIBED IN THIS PARAGRAPH TO AN IDENTIFIED  CRIMI-
 NAL INCIDENT OR SCHEME.
   (D)  "ROUTINE  OR  SPONTANEOUS  INVESTIGATORY  ACTIVITIES"  MEANS  THE
 FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENT:
   (I) INTERVIEWS;
   (II) TRAFFIC STOPS;
   (III) PEDESTRIAN STOPS;
 
  EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                            LBD07238-01-3

 S. 5093                             2
 
   (IV) FRISKS AND OTHER TYPES OF BODY SEARCHES;
   (V)  CONSENSUAL  OR  NONCONSENSUAL  SEARCHES  OF  PERSONS, PROPERTY OR
 POSSESSIONS (INCLUDING VEHICLES) OF INDIVIDUALS;
   (VI) DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENTS AND INVESTIGATIONS; AND
   (VII) INSPECTIONS AND INTERVIEWS.
   2. EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY  AND  EVERY  LAW  ENFORCEMENT  OFFICER
 SHALL BE PROHIBITED FROM ENGAGING IN RACIAL OR ETHNIC PROFILING.
   3.  EVERY  LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SHALL PROMULGATE AND ADOPT A WRITTEN
 POLICY WHICH PROHIBITS RACIAL OR ETHNIC  PROFILING.  IN  ADDITION,  EACH
 SUCH AGENCY SHALL PROMULGATE AND ADOPT PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW AND THE
 TAKING  OF  CORRECTIVE  ACTION WITH RESPECT TO COMPLAINTS BY INDIVIDUALS
 WHO ALLEGE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN THE SUBJECT OF RACIAL OR  ETHNIC  PROFIL-
 ING. A COPY OF EACH SUCH COMPLAINT RECEIVED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION AND
 WRITTEN  NOTIFICATION  OF  THE  REVIEW AND DISPOSITION OF SUCH COMPLAINT
 SHALL BE PROMPTLY PROVIDED BY SUCH AGENCY TO THE DIVISION.
   4.  EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SHALL, USING A FORM TO  BE  DETERMINED
 BY  THE  DIVISION,  RECORD  AND  RETAIN  THE  FOLLOWING INFORMATION WITH
 RESPECT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS EMPLOYED BY SUCH AGENCY:
   (A) THE NUMBER OF PERSONS STOPPED AS A RESULT OF A MOTOR VEHICLE  STOP
 FOR  TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS AND THE NUMBER OF PERSONS STOPPED AS A RESULT OF
 A ROUTINE OR SPONTANEOUS LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY  AS  DEFINED  IN  THIS
 SECTION;
   (B)  THE CHARACTERISTICS OF RACE, COLOR, ETHNICITY, NATIONAL ORIGIN OR
 RELIGION OF EACH SUCH PERSON, PROVIDED THE IDENTIFICATION OF SUCH  CHAR-
 ACTERISTICS  SHALL  BE  BASED  ON  THE OBSERVATION AND PERCEPTION OF THE
 OFFICER RESPONSIBLE FOR REPORTING THE STOP AND THE INFORMATION SHALL NOT
 BE REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED BY THE PERSON STOPPED;
   (C) IF A VEHICLE WAS STOPPED, THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS IN THE STOPPED
 MOTOR VEHICLE;
   (D) THE NATURE OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION THAT RESULTED IN THE  STOP  OR
 THE BASIS FOR THE CONDUCT THAT RESULTED IN THE INDIVIDUAL BEING STOPPED;
   (E)  WHETHER  A PAT DOWN OR FRISK WAS CONDUCTED AND, IF SO, THE RESULT
 OF THE PAT DOWN OR FRISK;
   (F) WHETHER A SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED AND,  IF  SO,  THE  RESULT  OF  THE
 SEARCH;
   (G)  IF  A SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED, WHETHER THE SEARCH WAS OF A PERSON, A
 PERSON'S PROPERTY, AND/OR A PERSON'S VEHICLE, AND WHETHER THE SEARCH WAS
 CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO CONSENT AND IF NOT, THE BASIS FOR  CONDUCTING  THE
 SEARCH  INCLUDING  ANY  ALLEGED  CRIMINAL  BEHAVIOR  THAT  JUSTIFIED THE
 SEARCH;
   (H) WHETHER AN INVENTORY SEARCH OF SUCH PERSON'S IMPOUNDED VEHICLE WAS
 CONDUCTED;
   (I) WHETHER A WARNING OR CITATION WAS ISSUED;
   (J) WHETHER AN ARREST WAS MADE AND FOR WHAT CHARGE OR CHARGES;
   (K) THE APPROXIMATE DURATION OF THE STOP; AND
   (L) THE TIME AND LOCATION OF THE STOP.
   5. EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY  SHALL  COMPILE  THE  INFORMATION  SET
 FORTH  IN  SUBDIVISION FOUR OF THIS SECTION FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR INTO A
 REPORT TO THE DIVISION. THE FORMAT OF SUCH REPORT SHALL BE DETERMINED BY
 THE DIVISION. THE REPORT SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO  THE  DIVISION  NO  LATER
 THAN MARCH FIRST OF THE FOLLOWING CALENDAR YEAR.
   6.    THE  DIVISION,  IN CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, SHALL
 DEVELOP AND PROMULGATE:
   (A) A FORM IN BOTH PRINTED AND ELECTRONIC FORMAT, TO BE  USED  BY  LAW
 ENFORCEMENT  OFFICERS  TO  RECORD  THE INFORMATION LISTED IN SUBDIVISION
 FOUR OF THIS SECTION; AND
 S. 5093                             3
 
   (B) A FORM TO BE USED TO REPORT  COMPLAINTS  PURSUANT  TO  SUBDIVISION
 THREE  OF  THIS  SECTION  BY  INDIVIDUALS  WHO  BELIEVE  THEY  HAVE BEEN
 SUBJECTED TO RACIAL OR ETHNIC PROFILING.
   7.  EVERY  LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SHALL PROMPTLY MAKE AVAILABLE TO THE
 ATTORNEY GENERAL, UPON DEMAND AND NOTICE, THE DOCUMENTS REQUIRED  TO  BE
 PRODUCED  AND  PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS THREE, FOUR AND FIVE
 OF THIS SECTION.
   8. EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY  SHALL  FURNISH  ALL  DATA/INFORMATION
 COLLECTED  PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION FOUR OF THIS SECTION TO THE DIVISION.
 THE DIVISION SHALL DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A PLAN FOR A COMPUTERIZED  DATA
 SYSTEM  FOR  PUBLIC  VIEWING  OF  SUCH  DATA AND SHALL PUBLISH AN ANNUAL
 REPORT ON DATA COLLECTED FOR THE  GOVERNOR,  THE  LEGISLATURE,  AND  THE
 PUBLIC  ON  LAW ENFORCEMENT STOPS. INFORMATION RELEASED SHALL NOT REVEAL
 THE IDENTITY OF ANY INDIVIDUAL.
   9. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY BRING AN ACTION ON BEHALF  OF  THE  PEOPLE
 FOR  INJUNCTIVE  RELIEF  AND/OR DAMAGES AGAINST A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
 THAT IS ENGAGING IN OR HAS ENGAGED IN AN ACT OR ACTS OF RACIAL PROFILING
 IN A COURT HAVING JURISDICTION TO ISSUE SUCH RELIEF. THE COURT MAY AWARD
 COSTS AND REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO  PREVAILS
 IN SUCH AN ACTION.
   10.  IN  ADDITION TO A CAUSE OF ACTION BROUGHT PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION
 NINE OF THIS SECTION, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF  AN  ACT
 OR  ACTS  OF  RACIAL PROFILING MAY BRING AN ACTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
 AND/OR DAMAGES AGAINST A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT IS  ENGAGED  IN  OR
 HAS  ENGAGED IN AN ACT OR ACTS OF RACIAL PROFILING.  THE COURT MAY AWARD
 COSTS AND REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES TO A PLAINTIFF WHO PREVAILS  IN  SUCH
 AN ACTION.
   11. NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED AS DIMINISHING OR ABRO-
 GATING  ANY RIGHT, REMEDY OR CAUSE OF ACTION WHICH AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS
 BEEN SUBJECT TO RACIAL OR ETHNIC PROFILING  MAY  HAVE  PURSUANT  TO  ANY
 OTHER PROVISION OF LAW.
   § 2. This act shall take effect immediately; provided that:
   1.  the  provisions of subdivision 4 of section 837-x of the executive
 law as added by section one of this act shall take effect on the nineti-
 eth day after it shall have become a law; and
   2. the provisions of subdivision 6 of section 837-x of  the  executive
 law  as added by section one of this act shall take effect on the sixti-
 eth day after it shall have become a law.

2023-S5093A - Details

See Assembly Version of this Bill:: A3978
Current Committee:: Senate Codes
Law Section:: Executive Law
Laws Affected:: Add §837-y, Exec L
Versions Introduced in Other Legislative Sessions:: 2009-2010: A1676
2011-2012: A2288
2013-2014: A2941
2015-2016: A3949
2017-2018: S6555, A4879
2019-2020: S1137, A4615
2021-2022: S583, S8121, A2662
2025-2026: S1350, A3475

2023-S5093A - Summary

2023-S5093A - Sponsor Memo

                                 
BILL NUMBER: S5093A

SPONSOR: CLEARE
 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the executive law, in relation to bias-based profiling

 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the executive law, in relation to bias-based profiling

 
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:

The proposed legislation prohibits law enforcement officers from using
racial and ethnic profiling establishes a collection of data on stops
and creates a course of action based on racial or ethic profiling.

 
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:

Section 1 would amend the executive law by creating a new section 837-t;
Subdivision one would contain definitions.

Subdivision two would prohibit law enforcement agencies and law enforce-
ment officers from engaging in racial or ethnic profiling.

Subdivision three would require every law enforcement agency to promul-
gate and adopt an anti-racial profiling policy as well as procedures for
reviewing complaints of racial or ethnic profiling. A copy of each
complaint and a written summary of the disposition would be required to
be forwarded to the division of criminal justice services.

Subdivision four would require each law enforcement agency to collect
and maintain data with respect to their civilian interactions while
conducting routine and spontaneous investigatory activities.

Subdivision five would require every law enforcement agency to compile
the data collected and forward an annual report to the division of crim-
inal justice services by March 1st of each year.

Subdivision six would require the division of criminal justice services
in consultation with the Attorney General to promulgate necessary forms
for the police agencies to use in their data collection.

Subdivision seven would require every law enforcement agency to make
documents required by this bill available to the Attorney General upon
notice and demand.

Subdivision eight would require every law enforcement agency to provide
all the collected data required by this proposal be made available to
the division of criminal justice services. The division would then
implement a computerized data system for public viewing of such data and
would publish an annual report on law enforcement stops without reveal-
ing the identity of any individuals.

Subdivisions nine and ten would provide a right of action for injunctive
relief and/or for damages to be brought by a private citizen who has
been the victim of racial profiling or by the Attorney General on behalf
of the people against a law enforcement agency that has engaged in
racial or ethnic profiling.
Subdivision eleven would establish that this section does not diminish
or abrogate any other right, remedy or cause of action which an individ-
ual who has been the subject of racial profiling may have.

Section 2 - contains the effective date.

 
SUMMARY OF CHANCES TO THE AMENDED VERSION:

In subdivision 1:

Swapped out "racial or ethnic profiling" for a broader definition of a
"bias-based profiling."

Slightly narrowed the definition of "routine and spontaneous investiga-
tory activity" to avoid inadvertently capturing activities outside of
the bill's intended scope.

Defined "political subdivision" (relevant to the newly added subdivision
5).

Added language to subdivision 3 requiring law enforcement agencies to
review the stop data they collect to ensure their practices effectively
prohibit bias-based profiling.

In subdivision 4, clarified the "stop" and "search" definitions and
suggested numerous additional stop data points recommended by experts
and/or OAG's Chief Investigator including:

Additional demographic characteristics.

Whether the person stopped appears to have limited English fluency.

Whether the person stopped appeared to be experiencing a mental or
behavioral crisis.

Whether the person stopped appeared to be experiencing homelessness.

Whether an officer ordered anyone to exit a vehicle.

Whether any property was seized and, if so, the type/ amount and basis
for the seizure.

Whether the officer used force against anyone.

Whether the officer pointed a firearm/ electronic control weapon at
anyone.

Whether the encounter resulted in a foot pursuit.

Basic information about the officer who initiated the stop.

Added a new subdivision 5 that would require relevant political subdivi-
sions to report data on settlements and judgements involving law
enforcement misconduct.

In subdivision 9, limited the civil actions that OAG could bring for
bias-based profiling to instances in which law enforcement agencies
engage in a pattern or practice of bias-based profiling.  Additionally,
enabled OAG to sue for equitable/ declaratory relief to enforce all of §
837-x.

In subdivision 10, enabled individuals to sue for equitable/ declaratory
relief to enforce all of § 837-x.

New subdivision 12 that would tie the reporting of stop and settlement/
judgement data to the finalization of regulations DOS would be required
to develop in consultation with OAG. The staggered implementation would
roll out as follows:

Agencies with 1,000+ officers would issue their first reports to DOS 14
months after the regulations are finalized (builds in a 2 month buffer
after which agencies could report a full year of data).

Agencies with 400 - 999 officers would issue their first reports to DOS
2 years after the regulations are finalized.

Agencies with 50 - 399 officers would issue their first reports to DOS 3
years after the regulations are finalized.

Agencies with 1- 49 officers would issue their first reports to DOS 4
years after regulations are finalized.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

The unconstitutional use of race or ethnicity as criteria has become the
focus of many civil and human rights groups. The practice is commonly
known as "racial profiling." Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, and other
minority groups have long been victims of biased and unjustified stops
by law enforcement officers. This consequently has had a corrosive
effect on the relations between police and the minority communities and
is of no benefit in reducing crime. In the first three quarters of 2016
(January - September), New Yorkers were stopped by the police 10,171
times. The demographics of those stopped were as follows: 54 percent
were black (5,401), 29 percent were Latino (2,944), and 10 percent were
white (1,042). Ultimately 76 percent of these stops (7,758) did not
result in an arrest and the individual was innocent. These statistics
show the racial bias inherent in police stops and this practice's ulti-
mate ineffectiveness.

The issue of racial profiling has gained national attention as courts
have recently found law enforcement agencies to be engaging in unconsti-
tutional practices. The Center for Constitutional Rights filed the
federal class action lawsuit Floyd, et al. v. City of New York, et al.
against the City of New York to challenge the New York Police Depart-
ment's practices of racial profiling and unconstitutional stop and
frisks of New York City residents. The named plaintiffs in the case
David Floyd, David Ourlicht, Lalit Clarkson, and Deon Dennis - represent
the thousands of primarily Black and Latino New Yorkers who have been
stopped without any cause on the way to work or home from school, in
front of their house, or just walking down the street. In a historic
ruling on August 12, 2013, following a nine-week trial, a federal judge
found the New York City Police Department liable for a pattern and prac-
tice of racial profiling and unconstitutional stops. Under a new admin-
istration, the City agreed to drop its appeal and begin the joint reme-
dial process ordered by the court.

The Floyd case stems from the landmark racial profiling case, Daniels,
at al. v. City of New York, et al., which led to the disbanding of the
infamous Street Crime Unit and a settlement with the City in 2003. The
Daniels settlement agreement required the NYPD to maintain a written
racial profiling policy that complies with the United States and New
York State constitutions and to provide stop-and-frisk data to CCR on a
quarterly basis from 2003 through 2007. Despite these significant cases,
racial profiling is still a practice that is rampantly engaged in by law
enforcement agencies across the state. In light of such circumstances,
it has become paramount for New York to address the issue of racial
profiling before it further continues to undermine the collaborative
relationship between communities of color and New York law enforcement
officers. This legislation aims to resolve the problem by prohibiting
police officers from using racial and ethnic profiling, b establishing
policies and procedures to collect data on racial and ethnic profiling
and by establishing a statewide public data base containing the
collected data which will promote law enforcement integrity as well as
to promote community support, particularly minority communities, for law
enforcement officers.

 
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

2019-20: A4615-A; Passed assembly

2017-18: A4879; Referred to Rules

2015-2016: A 3949 Passed Assembly

2013-2014: A.2941 Passed Assembly

2011-2012; A.2288 Passed Assembly

2010: A.1676A Passed Assembly

2009 A.1676 Passed Assembly

2007 A.627 Passed Assembly

2005-06 A.2456A Passed Assembly

2003-04 A.11542 Passed Assembly

 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Related to the promulgation of regulations, the collection of data, the
publishing of an annual report and the establishment of the public data
base.

 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately, with subdivision 4 taking effect
in 90 days and subdivision 6 taking effect in 60.

2023-S5093A - Bill Text download pdf

                             
                     S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                  5093--A
 
                        2023-2024 Regular Sessions
 
                             I N  S E N A T E
 
                             February 22, 2023
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by  Sen.  CLEARE -- read twice and ordered printed, and when
   printed to be committed to the Committee on Codes  --  recommitted  to
   the  Committee  on  Codes  in accordance with Senate Rule 6, sec. 8 --
   committee discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as  amended  and
   recommitted to said committee

 AN ACT to amend the executive law, in relation to bias-based profiling
 
   THE  PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
 BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
 
   Section 1. The executive law is amended by adding a new section  837-y
 to read as follows:
   § 837-Y. BIAS-BASED PROFILING. 1. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION:
   (A)  "LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY" MEANS AN AGENCY ESTABLISHED BY THE STATE
 OR A UNIT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENGAGED IN THE PREVENTION,  DETECTION,  OR
 INVESTIGATION OF VIOLATIONS OF CRIMINAL LAW.
   (B) "LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER" MEANS A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER,
 AS  DEFINED IN SUBDIVISIONS THIRTY-THREE AND THIRTY-FOUR OF SECTION 1.20
 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW, EMPLOYED BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
   (C) "BIAS-BASED PROFILING" MEANS THE RELIANCE, TO ANY DEGREE, ON ACTU-
 AL OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, ETHNICITY, NATIONAL ORIGIN, IMMIGRATION  OR
 CITIZENSHIP STATUS, AGE, RELIGION, GENDER IDENTITY OR EXPRESSION, SEXUAL
 ORIENTATION,  MENTAL  OR  PHYSICAL  DISABILITY, SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, OR
 HOUSING STATUS IN SELECTING  WHICH  PERSONS  TO  SUBJECT  TO  STOPS,  IN
 SELECTING  WHICH  LOCATIONS  TO SUBJECT PERSONS TO STOPS, OR IN DECIDING
 THE SCOPE OR SUBSTANCE OF  LAW  ENFORCEMENT  ACTION  AGAINST  A  PERSON,
 EXCEPT THAT AN OFFICER MAY CONSIDER OR RELY ON CHARACTERISTICS LISTED IN
 A  SPECIFIC  SUSPECT  DESCRIPTION RELEVANT TO THE LOCALITY AND TIMEFRAME
 AND BASED ON TRUSTWORTHY INFORMATION.
   (D)  "ROUTINE  OR  SPONTANEOUS  INVESTIGATORY  ACTIVITIES"  MEANS  THE
 FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER:
   (I) INTERVIEWS;
   (II) TRAFFIC STOPS;
 
  EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                            LBD07238-07-4

 S. 5093--A                          2
 
   (III) PEDESTRIAN STOPS;
   (IV) FRISKS AND OTHER TYPES OF BODY SEARCHES; AND
   (V)  CONSENSUAL  OR  NONCONSENSUAL  SEARCHES  OF  PERSONS, PROPERTY OR
 POSSESSIONS (INCLUDING VEHICLES) OF INDIVIDUALS.
   (E) "POLITICAL SUBDIVISION" MEANS ANY  COUNTY,  MUNICIPALITY,  DEPART-
 MENT,  COMMISSION, DISTRICT, BOARD, OR OTHER PUBLIC BODY, WHETHER CORPO-
 RATE OR OTHERWISE, CREATED BY  OR  UNDER  STATE  LAW,  THAT  HAS  A  LAW
 ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OR EMPLOYS LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.
   2.  EVERY  LAW  ENFORCEMENT  AGENCY  AND EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER
 SHALL BE PROHIBITED FROM ENGAGING IN BIAS-BASED PROFILING.
   3. EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SHALL PROMULGATE AND ADOPT  A  WRITTEN
 POLICY  WHICH  PROHIBITS  BIAS-BASED PROFILING. THE POLICY SHALL BE MADE
 PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.  IN ADDITION, EACH SUCH AGENCY SHALL PROMULGATE  AND
 ADOPT PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW AND THE TAKING OF CORRECTIVE ACTION WITH
 RESPECT  TO COMPLAINTS BY INDIVIDUALS WHO ALLEGE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN THE
 SUBJECT OF BIAS-BASED PROFILING.  THE  POLICY  SHALL  BE  MADE  PUBLICLY
 AVAILABLE.  IN  A MANNER DETERMINED BY THE DIVISION IN CONSULTATION WITH
 THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, A COPY OF EACH SUCH COMPLAINT RECEIVED PURSUANT TO
 THIS SECTION AND WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF THE REVIEW AND  DISPOSITION  OF
 SUCH  COMPLAINT  SHALL  BE PROMPTLY PROVIDED BY SUCH AGENCY TO THE DIVI-
 SION.  FURTHERMORE, ON OR BEFORE ITS EFFECTIVE DATE SET FORTH IN  SUBDI-
 VISION  TWELVE  OF  THIS SECTION, AND AT LEAST ONCE ANNUALLY THEREAFTER,
 EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SHALL REVIEW  THE  DATA  IT  HAS  COLLECTED
 PURSUANT  TO  SUBDIVISION FOUR OF THIS SECTION TO ENSURE THAT ITS PROCE-
 DURES, PRACTICES, AND TRAINING EFFECTIVELY ADDRESS  AND  PROHIBIT  BIAS-
 BASED PROFILING.
   4.    EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SHALL, USING A FORM TO BE DETERMINED
 BY THE DIVISION IN CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY  GENERAL,  RECORD  AND
 RETAIN  THE  FOLLOWING INCIDENT-SPECIFIC INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO LAW
 ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS EMPLOYED BY SUCH AGENCY:
   (A) THE NUMBER OF PERSONS STOPPED AS A RESULT OF A ROUTINE OR  SPONTA-
 NEOUS LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY AS DEFINED IN THIS SECTION;
   (B)    WHETHER  THE PERSON STOPPED WAS IN A VEHICLE AT THE TIME OF THE
 STOP;
   (C) THE CHARACTERISTICS OF RACE, COLOR,  ETHNICITY,  NATIONAL  ORIGIN,
 RELIGION,  AGE,  GENDER  IDENTITY OR EXPRESSION, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, AND
 MENTAL OR PHYSICAL DISABILITY OF EACH SUCH PERSON,  PROVIDED  THE  IDEN-
 TIFICATION OF SUCH CHARACTERISTICS SHALL BE BASED ON THE OBSERVATION AND
 PERCEPTION  OF  THE  OFFICER RESPONSIBLE FOR INITIATING THE STOP AND THE
 INFORMATION SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED BY THE PERSON STOPPED;
   (D) WHETHER THE PERSON STOPPED APPEARED TO HAVE LIMITED OR NO  ENGLISH
 FLUENCY;
   (E) WHETHER THE PERSON STOPPED APPEARED TO BE EXPERIENCING A MENTAL OR
 BEHAVIORAL CRISIS;
   (F)  WHETHER THE OFFICER PERCEIVED THE PERSON STOPPED TO BE EXPERIENC-
 ING HOMELESSNESS;
   (G) IF A VEHICLE WAS STOPPED, THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS IN THE STOPPED
 VEHICLE;
   (H) IF A VEHICLE WAS STOPPED, WHETHER THE OFFICER ORDERED  ANY  PERSON
 TO EXIT THE VEHICLE;
   (I) THE REASON THE STOP WAS INITIATED;
   (J)  IF  A SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED, WHETHER THE SEARCH WAS OF A PERSON, A
 PERSON'S PROPERTY AND/OR A PERSON'S  VEHICLE,  WHETHER  THE  SEARCH  WAS
 CONDUCTED  PURSUANT  TO  CONSENT,  THE  BASIS  FOR CONDUCTING THE SEARCH
 INCLUDING ANY ALLEGED CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR THAT JUSTIFIED THE  SEARCH,  AND
 WHAT, IF ANY, CONTRABAND OR EVIDENCE WAS DISCOVERED;
 S. 5093--A                          3
 
   (K) WHETHER AN INVENTORY SEARCH OF SUCH PERSON'S IMPOUNDED VEHICLE WAS
 CONDUCTED;
   (L) IF A SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED, WHETHER THE OFFICER SEIZED ANY PROPERTY
 AND,  IF  SO,  THE  TYPE  AND AMOUNT OF PROPERTY THAT WAS SEIZED AND THE
 BASIS FOR THE SEIZURE;
   (M) WHETHER A POLICE DOG PERFORMED A SNIFF AND, IF SO, WHETHER THE DOG
 ALERTED TO THE PRESENCE OF CONTRABAND;
   (N) WHETHER THE OFFICER HANDCUFFED OR OTHERWISE PHYSICALLY  RESTRAINED
 ANY PERSON DURING THE STOP;
   (O) WHETHER A WARNING OR CITATION WAS ISSUED AND, IF SO, THE VIOLATION
 OR VIOLATIONS CITED;
   (P) WHETHER AN ARREST WAS MADE AND, IF SO, FOR WHAT CHARGE OR CHARGES;
   (Q) WHETHER THE OFFICER USED PHYSICAL FORCE AGAINST ANY PERSON AND, IF
 SO, THE TYPE OF FORCE USED;
   (R) WHETHER THE OFFICER POINTED A FIREARM OR ELECTRONIC CONTROL WEAPON
 AT ANY PERSON;
   (S) WHETHER THE ENCOUNTER RESULTED IN A VEHICLE OR FOOT PURSUIT;
   (T) THE APPROXIMATE DURATION OF THE STOP;
   (U) THE TIME AND LOCATION OF THE STOP; AND
   (V) THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION ABOUT THE OFFICER INITIATING THE STOP:
   (I) THE TYPE OF ASSIGNMENT TO WHICH THE OFFICER WAS ASSIGNED;
   (II) THE OFFICER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE; AND
   (III)  THE  TOTAL  NUMBER  OF ARRESTS THE OFFICER HAS MADE IN THE PAST
 TWELVE MONTHS.
   5. EACH POLITICAL SUBDIVISION COVERED BY THIS SECTION SHALL FURNISH TO
 THE DIVISION, IN A MANNER THAT SHALL BE DEFINED AND  PRESCRIBED  BY  THE
 DIVISION IN CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, A REPORT WHICH SHALL
 INCLUDE:
   (A)  THE TOTAL AMOUNT SPENT IN THE PRIOR YEAR, EITHER BY THE POLITICAL
 SUBDIVISION OR BY ANY ENTITY ON BEHALF OF SUCH POLITICAL SUBDIVISION, ON
 SETTLEMENTS AND JUDGMENTS INVOLVING AN  ALLEGATION  OF  LAW  ENFORCEMENT
 MISCONDUCT,  INCLUDING  SETTLEMENTS  REACHED BEFORE ANY LAWSUIT HAS BEEN
 FILED, AND THAT SHALL BE BROKEN DOWN BY INDIVIDUAL SETTLEMENT  OR  JUDG-
 MENT, SHALL SPECIFY WHETHER A SETTLEMENT OR JUDGMENT IS BEING DESCRIBED,
 AND SHALL INCLUDE AT A MINIMUM:
   (I) A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE ALLEGATION OR CLAIM;
   (II)  THE  PORTION  OF THE SETTLEMENT OR JUDGMENT PAID DIRECTLY BY THE
 POLITICAL SUBDIVISION;
   (III) THE PORTION, IF ANY, PAID BY INSURANCE, OR  BY  A  CENTRAL  RISK
 MANAGEMENT FUND OR POOL; AND
   (IV)  IF ANY PORTION OF THE SETTLEMENT OR JUDGMENT IS PAID WITH BONDS,
 THE AMOUNT OF SUCH BONDS, AS WELL AS  THE  TOTAL  FUTURE  COST  OF  SUCH
 BONDS, INCLUDING ANY INTEREST AND FEES;
   (B)  THE TOTAL AMOUNT, IF ANY, SPENT ON ANY INSURANCE PREMIUMS PAID BY
 THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION FOR INSURANCE AGAINST LAW ENFORCEMENT  MISCON-
 DUCT;
   (C)  THE TOTAL AMOUNT, IF ANY, THAT THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION CONTRIB-
 UTED TO ANY CENTRAL RISK MANAGEMENT FUND OR RISK POOL TOWARD THE SETTLE-
 MENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT MISCONDUCT CLAIMS; AND
   (D) ANY INJUNCTIVE OR DECLARATORY RELIEF AWARDED,  OR  ANY  COMPARABLE
 TERMS IN ANY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.
   6.    THE  DIVISION,  IN CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, SHALL
 DEVELOP AND PROMULGATE:
   (A) A FORM IN BOTH PRINTED AND ELECTRONIC FORMAT, TO BE  USED  BY  LAW
 ENFORCEMENT  OFFICERS  TO  RECORD  THE INFORMATION LISTED IN SUBDIVISION
 FOUR OF THIS SECTION; AND
 S. 5093--A                          4
 
   (B) A FORM TO BE USED TO REPORT  COMPLAINTS  PURSUANT  TO  SUBDIVISION
 THREE  OF  THIS  SECTION  BY  INDIVIDUALS  WHO  BELIEVE  THEY  HAVE BEEN
 SUBJECTED TO BIAS-BASED PROFILING.
   7.  EVERY  LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SHALL PROMPTLY MAKE AVAILABLE TO THE
 ATTORNEY GENERAL, UPON DEMAND AND NOTICE, THE DOCUMENTS REQUIRED  TO  BE
 PRODUCED  AND PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE
 OF THIS SECTION.
   8. ON OR BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, AND AT LEAST  ONCE
 ANNUALLY THEREAFTER, EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY AND POLITICAL SUBDIVI-
 SION   COVERED   BY   THIS   SECTION   SHALL  COMPILE  AND  FURNISH  ALL
 DATA/INFORMATION COLLECTED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS  FOUR  AND  FIVE  OF
 THIS  SECTION  TO  THE  DIVISION. THE DIVISION, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE
 ATTORNEY GENERAL, SHALL DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A PLAN FOR A  COMPUTERIZED
 DATA  SYSTEM FOR PUBLIC VIEWING OF SUCH DATA AND SHALL PUBLISH AN ANNUAL
 REPORT ON DATA COLLECTED FOR THE  GOVERNOR,  THE  LEGISLATURE,  AND  THE
 PUBLIC.  INFORMATION  RELEASED PUBLICLY SHALL NOT REVEAL THE IDENTITY OF
 ANY INDIVIDUAL.  ANY INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE DIVISION SHALL BE  MADE
 AVAILABLE TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL UPON REQUEST.
   9.  THE  ATTORNEY  GENERAL MAY BRING AN ACTION ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE
 FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND/OR DAMAGES AGAINST A  LAW  ENFORCEMENT  AGENCY
 THAT  IS  ENGAGING  IN  OR HAS ENGAGED IN A PATTERN OR PRACTICE OF BIAS-
 BASED PROFILING IN A COURT HAVING JURISDICTION TO ISSUE SUCH RELIEF. THE
 COURT MAY AWARD COSTS AND  REASONABLE  ATTORNEY  FEES  TO  THE  ATTORNEY
 GENERAL WHO PREVAILS IN SUCH AN ACTION.  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY INVES-
 TIGATE AND, IF WARRANTED, BRING A CIVIL ACTION FOR EQUITABLE OR DECLARA-
 TORY  RELIEF  AGAINST A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH
 THE REMAINING PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION.
   10. IN ADDITION TO A CAUSE OF ACTION BROUGHT PURSUANT  TO  SUBDIVISION
 NINE  OF  THIS SECTION, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF AN ACT
 OR ACTS OF BIAS-BASED PROFILING  MAY  BRING  AN  ACTION  FOR  INJUNCTIVE
 RELIEF  AND/OR  DAMAGES AGAINST A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT IS ENGAGED
 IN OR HAS ENGAGED IN AN ACT OR ACTS OF BIAS-BASED PROFILING.  THE  COURT
 MAY AWARD COSTS AND REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES TO A PLAINTIFF WHO PREVAILS
 IN  SUCH AN ACTION.  IN ADDITION, AN INDIVIDUAL MAY BRING A CIVIL ACTION
 FOR EQUITABLE OR DECLARATORY RELIEF AGAINST  A  LAW  ENFORCEMENT  AGENCY
 THAT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THE REMAINING PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION.
   11. NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED AS DIMINISHING OR ABRO-
 GATING  ANY RIGHT, REMEDY OR CAUSE OF ACTION WHICH AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS
 BEEN SUBJECT TO BIAS-BASED PROFILING MAY  HAVE  PURSUANT  TO  ANY  OTHER
 PROVISION OF LAW.
   12.  EACH  LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY AND POLITICAL SUBDIVISION COVERED BY
 THIS SECTION SHALL REPORT ALL INFORMATION REQUIRED BY SUBDIVISIONS  FOUR
 AND FIVE OF THIS SECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE:
   (A)  EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT EMPLOYS ONE THOUSAND OR MORE LAW
 ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AND EACH POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THAT  HAS  SUCH  AN
 AGENCY,  SHALL ISSUE THEIR FIRST ANNUAL REPORTS PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS
 FOUR AND FIVE OF THIS SECTION NO LATER THAN FOURTEEN  MONTHS  AFTER  THE
 REGULATIONS PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION HAVE BEEN FINALIZED;
   (B)  EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT EMPLOYS FOUR HUNDRED OR MORE BUT
 LESS THAN ONE THOUSAND LAW  ENFORCEMENT  OFFICERS,  AND  EACH  POLITICAL
 SUBDIVISION  THAT  HAS  SUCH  AN  AGENCY, SHALL ISSUE THEIR FIRST ANNUAL
 REPORTS PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS FOUR AND FIVE OF THIS SECTION NO  LATER
 THAN  TWO  YEARS  AFTER  THE  REGULATIONS  PROMULGATED  PURSUANT TO THIS
 SECTION HAVE BEEN FINALIZED;
   (C) EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT EMPLOYS FIFTY OR  MORE  BUT  LESS
 THAN  FOUR HUNDRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AND EACH POLITICAL SUBDIVI-
 S. 5093--A                          5
 
 SION THAT HAS SUCH AN AGENCY, SHALL ISSUE  THEIR  FIRST  ANNUAL  REPORTS
 PURSUANT  TO  SUBDIVISIONS  FOUR  AND FIVE OF THIS SECTION NO LATER THAN
 THREE YEARS AFTER THE REGULATIONS PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO  THIS  SECTION
 HAVE BEEN FINALIZED; AND
   (D) EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT EMPLOYS ONE OR MORE BUT LESS THAN
 FIFTY  LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AND EACH POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THAT HAS
 SUCH AN AGENCY, SHALL ISSUE  THEIR  FIRST  ANNUAL  REPORTS  PURSUANT  TO
 SUBDIVISIONS  FOUR  AND  FIVE  OF  THIS SECTION NO LATER THAN FOUR YEARS
 AFTER THE REGULATIONS PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO  THIS  SECTION  HAVE  BEEN
 FINALIZED.
   13.  NO LATER THAN ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF
 THIS SECTION, THE DIVISION, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE  ATTORNEY  GENERAL,
 SHALL  ADOPT  REGULATIONS  FOR  THE  COLLECTION  AND  REPORTING  OF DATA
 REQUIRED UNDER THIS SECTION, IN A MANNER PRESCRIBED  UNDER  SECTION  TWO
 HUNDRED  TWO  OF THE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT. THE REGULATIONS
 ADOPTED SHALL SPECIFY ALL DATA TO BE REPORTED,  AND  PROVIDE  STANDARDS,
 DEFINITIONS,  AND  TECHNICAL  SPECIFICATIONS  NOT  INCONSISTENT WITH THE
 REQUIREMENTS OF THIS  SECTION  TO  ENSURE  UNIFORM  REPORTING  PRACTICES
 ACROSS  ALL  REPORTING  ENTITIES. TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, AND CONSISTENT
 WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION, SUCH REGULATIONS SHALL BE COMPAT-
 IBLE WITH ANY SIMILAR FEDERAL DATA COLLECTION OR REPORTING PROGRAMS.
   § 2. This act shall take effect immediately.

co-Sponsors

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Details

See Assembly Version of this Bill:: A3978
Current Committee:: Senate Codes
Law Section:: Executive Law
Laws Affected:: Add §837-y, Exec L
Versions Introduced in Other Legislative Sessions:: 2009-2010: A1676
2011-2012: A2288
2013-2014: A2941
2015-2016: A3949
2017-2018: S6555, A4879
2019-2020: S1137, A4615
2021-2022: S583, S8121, A2662
2025-2026: S1350, A3475

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Summary

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

                                 
BILL NUMBER: S5093B

SPONSOR: CLEARE
 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the executive law, in relation to bias-based profiling

 
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:

The proposed legislation prohibits law enforcement officers from using
racial, ethnic, or other bias-based profiling; establishes a collection
of data on stops; and creates a course of action based on bias-based
profiling.

 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

Section 1 would amend the executive law by creating a new section 837-y;
Subdivision one would contain definitions.  Subdivision two would
prohibit law enforcement agencies and law enforcement officers from
engaging in racial or ethnic profiling.  Subdivision three would require
every law enforcement agency to promulgate and adopt an anti-bias-based-
profiling policy as well as procedures for reviewing complaints of bias-

based profiling. A copy of each complaint and a written summary of the
disposition would be required to be forwarded to the division of crimi-
nal justice services.

Subdivision four would require each law enforcement agency to collect
and maintain data with respect to their reportable encounters Subdivi-
sion five would require every law enforcement agency to compile the data
collected and forward an annual report to the division of criminal
justice services by March 1st of each year.  Subdivision six would
require the division of criminal justice services in consultation with
the Attorney General to promulgate necessary forms for the police agen-
cies to use in their data collection. Subdivision seven would require
every law enforcement agency to make documents required by this bill
available to the Attorney General upon notice and demand.

Subdivisions eight and nine would provide a right of action for injunc-
tive relief and/or for damages to be brought by a private citizen who
has been the victim of racial profiling or by the Attorney General on
behalf of the people against a law enforcement agency that has engaged
in racial or ethnic profiling. Subdivision eleven would establish that
this section does not diminish or abrogate any other right, remedy or
cause of action which an individual who has been the subject of racial
profiling may have. Subdivision ten states nothing in this section shall
diminish or abrogate any right, remedy, or cause of action.  Subdivision
eleven establishes the reporting requirements. Subdivision twelve estab-
lishes that no later than 180 days from the effective date the subdivi-
sion shall adopt regulations for collecting and reporting the data.

Subdivision thirteen establishes that any local legislative body may
adopt additional duties and requirements. Section 2 - contains the
effective date.

 
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND AMENDED VERSION (IF APPLICABLE):

Changed the term "racial or ethnic profiling" to "bias-based profiling",
to more fully encompass and prevent class-based profiling.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

The unconstitutional use of race or ethnicity as criteria has become the
focus of many civil and human rights groups. The practice is commonly
known as "racial profiling." Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, and other
minority groups have long been victims of biased and unjustified stops
by law enforcement officers. This consequently has had a corrosive
effect on the relations between police and the minority communities and
is of no benefit in reducing crime. In the first three quarters of 2016
(January - September), New Yorkers were stopped by the police 10,171
times. The demographics of those stopped were as follows: 54 percent
were black (5;401), 29 percent were Latino (2,944), and 10 percent were
white (1,042). Ultimately 76 percent of these stops (7,758) did not
result in an arrest and the individual was innocent. These statistics
show the racial bias inherent in police stops and this practice's ulti-
mate ineffectiveness. This bill expands the traditional definition of
racial and ethnic profiling to extend the same protections against bias-
based profiling to members of other minority communities that are faced
with bias-based profiling based on attributes other than race or ethnic-
ity. The issue of racial profiling has gained national attention as
courts have recently found law enforcement agencies to be engaging in
unconstitutional practices. The Center for Constitutional Rights filed
the federal class action lawsuit Floyd, et al. v. City of New York, et
al. against the City of New York to challenge the New York Police
Department's practices of racial profiling and unconstitutional stop and
frisks of New York City residents. The named plaintiffs in the case
David Floyd, David Ourlicht, Lalit Clarkson, and Deon Dennis represent
the thousands of primarily Black and Latino New Yorkers who have been
stopped without any cause on the way to work or home from school, in
front of their house, or just walking down the street. In a historic
ruling on August 12, 2013, following a nine-week trial, a federal judge
found the New York City Police Department liable for a pattern and prac-
tice of racial profiling and unconstitutional stops. Under a new admin-
istration, the City agreed to 'drop its appeal and begin the joint reme-
dial process ordered by the court. The Floyd case stems from the
landmark racial profiling case, Daniels, at al. v. City of New York, et
al., which led to the disbanding of the infamous Street Crime Unit and a
settlement with the City in 200 3. The Daniels settlement agreement
required the NYPD to maintain a written racial profiling policy that
complies with the United States and New York State constitutions and to
provide stop-and frisk data to CCR on a quarterly basis from 2003
through 2007. Despite these significant cases, racial profiling is still
a practice that is rampantly engaged in by law enforcement agencies
across the state. In light of such circumstances, it has become para-
mount for New York to address the issue of racial profiling before it
further continues to undermine the collaborative relationship between
communities of color and New York law enforcement officers. This legis-
lation aims to resolve the problem by prohibiting police officers from
using racial and ethnic profiling, b establishing policies and proce-
dures to collect data on racial and ethnic profiling and by establishing
a statewide public data base containing the collected data which will
promote law enforcement integrity as well as to promote community
support, particularly minority communities, for law enforcement offi-
cers.

 
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

2021-22: A2662-A, referred to codes
2019-20: A4613-A; Passed assembly

2017-18: A4879; Referred to Rules

 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Related to the promulgation of regulations, the collection of data, the
publishing of an annual report and the establishment of the public data
base.

 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

                             
                     S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                  5093--B
 
                        2023-2024 Regular Sessions
 
                             I N  S E N A T E
 
                             February 22, 2023
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by  Sen.  CLEARE -- read twice and ordered printed, and when
   printed to be committed to the Committee on Codes  --  recommitted  to
   the  Committee  on  Codes  in accordance with Senate Rule 6, sec. 8 --
   committee discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as  amended  and
   recommitted  to  said committee -- committee discharged, bill amended,
   ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee
 
 AN ACT to amend the executive law, in relation to bias-based profiling
 
   THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
 BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
 
   Section  1. The executive law is amended by adding a new section 837-y
 to read as follows:
   § 837-Y. BIAS-BASED PROFILING. 1. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION:
   (A) "LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY" MEANS AN AGENCY ESTABLISHED BY THE  STATE
 OR  A  UNIT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENGAGED IN THE PREVENTION, DETECTION, OR
 INVESTIGATION OF VIOLATIONS OF CRIMINAL LAW.
   (B) "LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER" MEANS A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER,
 AS DEFINED IN SUBDIVISIONS THIRTY-THREE AND THIRTY-FOUR OF SECTION  1.20
 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW, EMPLOYED BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
   (C) "BIAS-BASED PROFILING" MEANS THE RELIANCE, TO ANY DEGREE, ON ACTU-
 AL  OR PERCEIVED RACE, COLOR, ETHNICITY, NATIONAL ORIGIN, IMMIGRATION OR
 CITIZENSHIP STATUS, AGE, RELIGION, GENDER IDENTITY OR EXPRESSION, SEXUAL
 ORIENTATION, MENTAL OR PHYSICAL  DISABILITY,  SOCIOECONOMIC  STATUS,  OR
 HOUSING  STATUS  IN  SELECTING  WHICH  PERSONS  TO  SUBJECT TO STOPS, IN
 SELECTING WHICH LOCATIONS TO SUBJECT PERSONS TO STOPS,  OR  IN  DECIDING
 THE  SCOPE  OR  SUBSTANCE  OF  LAW  ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST A PERSON,
 EXCEPT THAT AN OFFICER MAY CONSIDER OR RELY ON CHARACTERISTICS LISTED IN
 A SPECIFIC SUSPECT DESCRIPTION RELEVANT TO THE  LOCALITY  AND  TIMEFRAME
 AND BASED ON TRUSTWORTHY INFORMATION.
   (D)  "REPORTABLE  ENCOUNTER"  MEANS  THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES BY A LAW
 ENFORCEMENT OFFICER:
 
  EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                            LBD07238-11-4
 S. 5093--B                          2

 
   (I) THE STOP OF A VEHICLE THAT, BASED ON A  TOTALITY  OF  THE  CIRCUM-
 STANCES,  WOULD  MAKE A REASONABLE PERSON FEEL THAT THEY ARE NOT FREE TO
 LEAVE OR OTHERWISE TERMINATE THE ENCOUNTER;
   (II) THE STOP OF A PEDESTRIAN THAT, BASED ON A TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUM-
 STANCES,  WOULD  MAKE A REASONABLE PERSON FEEL THAT THEY ARE NOT FREE TO
 LEAVE OR OTHERWISE TERMINATE THE ENCOUNTER;
   (III) FRISKS AND OTHER TYPES OF BODY SEARCHES; AND
   (IV) CONSENSUAL OR NONCONSENSUAL  SEARCHES  OF  PERSONS,  PROPERTY  OR
 POSSESSIONS (INCLUDING VEHICLES) OF INDIVIDUALS.
   (E)  "POLITICAL  SUBDIVISION"  MEANS ANY COUNTY, MUNICIPALITY, DEPART-
 MENT, COMMISSION, DISTRICT, BOARD, OR OTHER PUBLIC BODY, WHETHER  CORPO-
 RATE  OR  OTHERWISE,  CREATED  BY  OR  UNDER  STATE  LAW, THAT HAS A LAW
 ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OR EMPLOYS LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.
   2. EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY  AND  EVERY  LAW  ENFORCEMENT  OFFICER
 SHALL BE PROHIBITED FROM ENGAGING IN BIAS-BASED PROFILING.
   3.  EVERY  LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SHALL PROMULGATE AND ADOPT A WRITTEN
 POLICY WHICH PROHIBITS BIAS-BASED PROFILING. THE POLICY  SHALL  BE  MADE
 PUBLICLY  AVAILABLE.  IN ADDITION, EACH SUCH AGENCY SHALL PROMULGATE AND
 ADOPT PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW AND THE TAKING OF CORRECTIVE ACTION WITH
 RESPECT TO COMPLAINTS BY INDIVIDUALS WHO ALLEGE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN  THE
 SUBJECT  OF  BIAS-BASED  PROFILING.  THE  POLICY  SHALL BE MADE PUBLICLY
 AVAILABLE. IN A MANNER DETERMINED BY THE DIVISION IN  CONSULTATION  WITH
 THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, A COPY OF EACH SUCH COMPLAINT RECEIVED PURSUANT TO
 THIS  SECTION  AND WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF THE REVIEW AND DISPOSITION OF
 SUCH COMPLAINT SHALL BE PROMPTLY PROVIDED BY SUCH AGENCY  TO  THE  DIVI-
 SION.   AS SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISION ELEVEN OF THIS SECTION, AND AT LEAST
 ONCE ANNUALLY THEREAFTER, EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SHALL REVIEW  THE
 DATA  IT  HAS  COLLECTED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION FOUR OF THIS SECTION TO
 ENSURE THAT ITS PROCEDURES, PRACTICES, AND TRAINING EFFECTIVELY  ADDRESS
 AND PROHIBIT BIAS-BASED PROFILING.
   4.    EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SHALL, USING A FORM TO BE DETERMINED
 BY THE DIVISION IN CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY  GENERAL,  RECORD  AND
 RETAIN  THE  FOLLOWING INCIDENT-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR EACH REPORTABLE
 ENCOUNTER WITH RESPECT TO LAW  ENFORCEMENT  OFFICERS  EMPLOYED  BY  SUCH
 AGENCY:
   (A) THE NUMBER OF PERSONS STOPPED;
   (B)    WHETHER  THE PERSON STOPPED WAS IN A VEHICLE AT THE TIME OF THE
 STOP;
   (C) THE CHARACTERISTICS OF RACE, COLOR,  ETHNICITY,  NATIONAL  ORIGIN,
 RELIGION,  AGE,  GENDER  IDENTITY OR EXPRESSION, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, AND
 MENTAL OR PHYSICAL DISABILITY OF EACH SUCH PERSON,  PROVIDED  THE  IDEN-
 TIFICATION OF SUCH CHARACTERISTICS SHALL BE BASED ON THE OBSERVATION AND
 PERCEPTION  OF  THE  OFFICER RESPONSIBLE FOR INITIATING THE STOP AND THE
 INFORMATION SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED BY THE PERSON STOPPED;
   (D) WHETHER THE PERSON STOPPED APPEARED TO HAVE LIMITED OR NO  ENGLISH
 FLUENCY;
   (E) WHETHER THE PERSON STOPPED APPEARED TO BE EXPERIENCING A MENTAL OR
 BEHAVIORAL CRISIS;
   (F)  WHETHER THE OFFICER PERCEIVED THE PERSON STOPPED TO BE EXPERIENC-
 ING HOMELESSNESS;
   (G) IF A VEHICLE WAS STOPPED, THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS IN THE STOPPED
 VEHICLE;
   (H) IF A VEHICLE WAS STOPPED, WHETHER THE OFFICER ORDERED  ANY  PERSON
 TO EXIT THE VEHICLE;
   (I) THE REASON THE STOP WAS INITIATED;
 S. 5093--B                          3
 
   (J)  IF  A SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED, WHETHER THE SEARCH WAS OF A PERSON, A
 PERSON'S PROPERTY AND/OR A PERSON'S  VEHICLE,  WHETHER  THE  SEARCH  WAS
 CONDUCTED  PURSUANT  TO  CONSENT,  THE  BASIS  FOR CONDUCTING THE SEARCH
 INCLUDING ANY ALLEGED CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR THAT JUSTIFIED THE  SEARCH,  AND
 WHAT, IF ANY, CONTRABAND OR EVIDENCE WAS DISCOVERED;
   (K) WHETHER AN INVENTORY SEARCH OF SUCH PERSON'S IMPOUNDED VEHICLE WAS
 CONDUCTED;
   (L) IF A SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED, WHETHER THE OFFICER SEIZED ANY PROPERTY
 AND,  IF  SO,  THE  TYPE  AND AMOUNT OF PROPERTY THAT WAS SEIZED AND THE
 BASIS FOR THE SEIZURE;
   (M) WHETHER A POLICE DOG PERFORMED A SNIFF AND, IF SO, WHETHER THE DOG
 ALERTED TO THE PRESENCE OF CONTRABAND;
   (N) WHETHER THE OFFICER HANDCUFFED OR OTHERWISE PHYSICALLY  RESTRAINED
 ANY PERSON DURING THE STOP;
   (O) WHETHER A WARNING OR CITATION WAS ISSUED AND, IF SO, THE VIOLATION
 OR VIOLATIONS CITED;
   (P) WHETHER AN ARREST WAS MADE AND, IF SO, FOR WHAT CHARGE OR CHARGES;
   (Q) WHETHER THE OFFICER USED PHYSICAL FORCE AGAINST ANY PERSON AND, IF
 SO, THE TYPE OF FORCE USED;
   (R) WHETHER THE OFFICER POINTED A FIREARM OR ELECTRONIC CONTROL WEAPON
 AT ANY PERSON;
   (S) WHETHER THE ENCOUNTER RESULTED IN A VEHICLE OR FOOT PURSUIT;
   (T) THE APPROXIMATE DURATION OF THE STOP;
   (U) THE DATE, TIME AND LOCATION OF THE STOP; AND
   (V) THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION ABOUT THE OFFICER INITIATING THE STOP:
   (I) THE TYPE OF ASSIGNMENT TO WHICH THE OFFICER WAS ASSIGNED;
   (II) THE OFFICER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE; AND
   (III)  THE  TOTAL  NUMBER  OF ARRESTS THE OFFICER HAS MADE IN THE PAST
 TWELVE MONTHS.
   5. EACH POLITICAL SUBDIVISION COVERED BY THIS SECTION SHALL FURNISH TO
 THE DIVISION, IN A MANNER THAT SHALL BE DEFINED AND  PRESCRIBED  BY  THE
 DIVISION IN CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, A REPORT WHICH SHALL
 INCLUDE:
   (A)  THE TOTAL AMOUNT SPENT IN THE PRIOR YEAR, EITHER BY THE POLITICAL
 SUBDIVISION OR BY ANY ENTITY ON BEHALF OF SUCH POLITICAL SUBDIVISION, ON
 SETTLEMENTS AND JUDGMENTS INVOLVING AN  ALLEGATION  OF  LAW  ENFORCEMENT
 MISCONDUCT,  INCLUDING  SETTLEMENTS  REACHED BEFORE ANY LAWSUIT HAS BEEN
 FILED, AND THAT SHALL BE BROKEN DOWN BY INDIVIDUAL SETTLEMENT  OR  JUDG-
 MENT, SHALL SPECIFY WHETHER A SETTLEMENT OR JUDGMENT IS BEING DESCRIBED,
 AND SHALL INCLUDE AT A MINIMUM:
   (I) A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE ALLEGATION OR CLAIM;
   (II)  THE  PORTION  OF THE SETTLEMENT OR JUDGMENT PAID DIRECTLY BY THE
 POLITICAL SUBDIVISION;
   (III) THE PORTION, IF ANY, PAID BY INSURANCE, OR  BY  A  CENTRAL  RISK
 MANAGEMENT FUND OR POOL; AND
   (IV)  IF ANY PORTION OF THE SETTLEMENT OR JUDGMENT IS PAID WITH BONDS,
 THE AMOUNT OF SUCH BONDS, AS WELL AS  THE  TOTAL  FUTURE  COST  OF  SUCH
 BONDS, INCLUDING ANY INTEREST AND FEES;
   (B)  THE TOTAL AMOUNT, IF ANY, SPENT ON ANY INSURANCE PREMIUMS PAID BY
 THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION FOR INSURANCE AGAINST LAW ENFORCEMENT  MISCON-
 DUCT;
   (C)  THE TOTAL AMOUNT, IF ANY, THAT THE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION CONTRIB-
 UTED TO ANY CENTRAL RISK MANAGEMENT FUND OR RISK POOL TOWARD THE SETTLE-
 MENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT MISCONDUCT CLAIMS; AND
   (D) ANY INJUNCTIVE OR DECLARATORY RELIEF AWARDED,  OR  ANY  COMPARABLE
 TERMS IN ANY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.
 S. 5093--B                          4
 
   6.    THE  DIVISION,  IN CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, SHALL
 DEVELOP AND PROMULGATE:
   (A)  A  FORM  IN BOTH PRINTED AND ELECTRONIC FORMAT, TO BE USED BY LAW
 ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO RECORD THE  INFORMATION  LISTED  IN  SUBDIVISION
 FOUR OF THIS SECTION; AND
   (B)  A  FORM  TO  BE USED TO REPORT COMPLAINTS PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION
 THREE OF  THIS  SECTION  BY  INDIVIDUALS  WHO  BELIEVE  THEY  HAVE  BEEN
 SUBJECTED TO BIAS-BASED PROFILING.
   7.  EVERY  LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY SHALL PROMPTLY MAKE AVAILABLE TO THE
 ATTORNEY GENERAL, UPON DEMAND AND NOTICE, THE DOCUMENTS REQUIRED  TO  BE
 PRODUCED  AND PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE
 OF THIS SECTION.
   8. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY BRING AN ACTION ON BEHALF  OF  THE  PEOPLE
 FOR  INJUNCTIVE  RELIEF  AND/OR DAMAGES AGAINST A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
 THAT IS ENGAGING IN OR HAS ENGAGED IN A PATTERN  OR  PRACTICE  OF  BIAS-
 BASED PROFILING IN A COURT HAVING JURISDICTION TO ISSUE SUCH RELIEF. THE
 COURT  MAY  AWARD  COSTS  AND  REASONABLE  ATTORNEY FEES TO THE ATTORNEY
 GENERAL WHO PREVAILS IN SUCH AN ACTION.  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY INVES-
 TIGATE AND, IF WARRANTED, BRING A CIVIL ACTION FOR EQUITABLE OR DECLARA-
 TORY RELIEF AGAINST A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT FAILS TO  COMPLY  WITH
 THE REMAINING PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION.
   9.  IN  ADDITION  TO A CAUSE OF ACTION BROUGHT PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION
 EIGHT OF THIS SECTION, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF AN  ACT
 OR  ACTS  OF  BIAS-BASED  PROFILING  MAY  BRING AN ACTION FOR INJUNCTIVE
 RELIEF AND/OR DAMAGES AGAINST A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT  IS  ENGAGED
 IN  OR HAS ENGAGED IN AN ACT OR ACTS OF BIAS-BASED PROFILING.  THE COURT
 MAY AWARD COSTS AND REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES TO A PLAINTIFF WHO PREVAILS
 IN SUCH AN ACTION.  IN ADDITION, AN INDIVIDUAL MAY BRING A CIVIL  ACTION
 FOR  EQUITABLE  OR  DECLARATORY  RELIEF AGAINST A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
 THAT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THE REMAINING PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION.
   10. NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED AS DIMINISHING OR ABRO-
 GATING ANY RIGHT, REMEDY OR CAUSE OF ACTION WHICH AN INDIVIDUAL WHO  HAS
 BEEN  SUBJECT  TO  BIAS-BASED  PROFILING  MAY HAVE PURSUANT TO ANY OTHER
 PROVISION OF LAW.
   11. EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY AND POLITICAL SUBDIVISION  COVERED  BY
 THIS SECTION SHALL ANNUALLY COMPILE AND FURNISH ALL DATA AND INFORMATION
 COLLECTED  PURSUANT  TO  SUBDIVISIONS FOUR AND FIVE OF THIS SECTION IN A
 REPORT TO THE DIVISION. THE DIVISION, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE  ATTORNEY
 GENERAL,  SHALL  DEVELOP  AND IMPLEMENT A PLAN FOR A  COMPUTERIZED  DATA
 SYSTEM FOR PUBLIC VIEWING OF SUCH  DATA  AND  SHALL  PUBLISH  AN  ANNUAL
 REPORT ON DATA COLLECTED FOR THE  GOVERNOR,  THE  LEGISLATURE,  AND  THE
 PUBLIC.  INFORMATION  RELEASED PUBLICLY SHALL NOT REVEAL THE IDENTITY OF
 ANY INDIVIDUAL.  ANY INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE DIVISION SHALL BE  MADE
 AVAILABLE TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL UPON  REQUEST.  EACH  LAW  ENFORCEMENT
 AGENCY  AND  POLITICAL  SUBDIVISION COVERED BY THIS SECTION SHALL REPORT
 ALL INFORMATION REQUIRED BY SUBDIVISIONS FOUR AND FIVE OF  THIS  SECTION
 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE:
   (A)  EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT EMPLOYS ONE THOUSAND OR MORE LAW
 ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AND EACH POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THAT  HAS  SUCH  AN
 AGENCY,  SHALL ISSUE THEIR FIRST ANNUAL REPORTS PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS
 FOUR AND FIVE OF THIS SECTION NO LATER THAN FOURTEEN  MONTHS  AFTER  THE
 REGULATIONS PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION HAVE BEEN FINALIZED;
   (B)  EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT EMPLOYS FOUR HUNDRED OR MORE BUT
 LESS THAN ONE THOUSAND LAW  ENFORCEMENT  OFFICERS,  AND  EACH  POLITICAL
 SUBDIVISION  THAT  HAS  SUCH  AN  AGENCY, SHALL ISSUE THEIR FIRST ANNUAL
 REPORTS PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS FOUR AND FIVE OF THIS SECTION NO  LATER
 S. 5093--B                          5
 
 THAN  TWO  YEARS  AFTER  THE  REGULATIONS  PROMULGATED  PURSUANT TO THIS
 SECTION HAVE BEEN FINALIZED;
   (C)  EACH  LAW  ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT EMPLOYS FIFTY OR MORE BUT LESS
 THAN FOUR HUNDRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AND EACH POLITICAL  SUBDIVI-
 SION  THAT  HAS  SUCH  AN AGENCY, SHALL ISSUE THEIR FIRST ANNUAL REPORTS
 PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS FOUR AND FIVE OF THIS  SECTION  NO  LATER  THAN
 THREE  YEARS  AFTER THE REGULATIONS PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION
 HAVE BEEN FINALIZED; AND
   (D) EACH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT EMPLOYS ONE OR MORE BUT LESS THAN
 FIFTY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AND EACH POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THAT  HAS
 SUCH  AN  AGENCY,  SHALL  ISSUE  THEIR  FIRST ANNUAL REPORTS PURSUANT TO
 SUBDIVISIONS FOUR AND FIVE OF THIS SECTION  NO  LATER  THAN  FOUR  YEARS
 AFTER  THE  REGULATIONS  PROMULGATED  PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION HAVE BEEN
 FINALIZED.
   12. NO LATER THAN ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE  OF
 THIS  SECTION,  THE DIVISION, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL,
 SHALL ADOPT  REGULATIONS  FOR  THE  COLLECTION  AND  REPORTING  OF  DATA
 REQUIRED  UNDER  THIS  SECTION, IN A MANNER PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION TWO
 HUNDRED TWO OF THE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT.  THE  REGULATIONS
 ADOPTED  SHALL  SPECIFY  ALL DATA TO BE REPORTED, AND PROVIDE STANDARDS,
 DEFINITIONS, AND TECHNICAL  SPECIFICATIONS  NOT  INCONSISTENT  WITH  THE
 REQUIREMENTS  OF  THIS  SECTION  TO  ENSURE  UNIFORM REPORTING PRACTICES
 ACROSS ALL REPORTING ENTITIES. TO THE EXTENT  POSSIBLE,  AND  CONSISTENT
 WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION, SUCH REGULATIONS SHALL BE COMPAT-
 IBLE WITH ANY SIMILAR FEDERAL DATA COLLECTION OR REPORTING PROGRAMS.
   13.  ANY  LOCAL  LEGISLATIVE  BODY  MAY ADOPT LOCAL LAWS THROUGH LOCAL
 ORDER, AND ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY  MAY  PRESCRIBE  RULES  AND  REGU-
 LATIONS,  THAT  IMPOSE  ADDITIONAL  DUTIES  AND  REQUIREMENTS  UPON  LAW
 ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES OR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS  PROVIDED  SUCH  DUTIES
 AND REQUIREMENTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION.
   § 2. This act shall take effect immediately.

Comments

Open Legislation is a forum for New York State legislation. All comments are subject to review and community moderation is encouraged.

Comments deemed off-topic, commercial, campaign-related, self-promotional; or that contain profanity, hate or toxic speech; or that link to sites outside of the nysenate.gov domain are not permitted, and will not be published. Attempts to intimidate and silence contributors or deliberately deceive the public, including excessive or extraneous posting/posts, or coordinated activity, are prohibited and may result in the temporary or permanent banning of the user. Comment moderation is generally performed Monday through Friday. By contributing or voting you agree to the Terms of Participation and verify you are over 13.

Create an account. An account allows you to sign petitions with a single click, officially support or oppose key legislation, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Find your Senator and share your views on important issues.

Do you support this bill?

Senate Bill S5093B

Sponsored By

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Senate Committee Codes Committee

Actions

Bill Amendments

2023-S5093 - Details

2023-S5093 - Summary

2023-S5093 - Sponsor Memo

2023-S5093 - Bill Text download pdf

2023-S5093A - Details

2023-S5093A - Summary

2023-S5093A - Sponsor Memo

2023-S5093A - Bill Text download pdf

co-Sponsors

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Details

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Summary

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

Comments

Do you support this bill?

Get Status Alerts for 2023-S5093B

Senate Bill S5093B

Share this bill

Sponsored By

Cordell Cleare

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Senate Committee Codes Committee

Actions

Bill Amendments

2023-S5093 - Details

2023-S5093 - Summary

2023-S5093 - Sponsor Memo

2023-S5093 - Bill Text download pdf

2023-S5093A - Details

2023-S5093A - Summary

2023-S5093A - Sponsor Memo

2023-S5093A - Bill Text download pdf

co-Sponsors

Jamaal T. Bailey

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Details

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Summary

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

2023-S5093B (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

Comments