City Curfew found unconstitutional
Rochester, N.Y.–The New York State Supreme Court has found the City of Rochester’s curfew, which keeps kids off the streets at night, to be unconstitutional.
Mayor Robert Duffy announced today, with regret, that the curfew has been invalidated by the Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
Mayor Duffy is planning an appeal and released a statement (my highlight)
“The curfew has been established and enforced with the best interests of our youth in mind. The curfew has always been designed to protect our youth from being victims of crime or from becoming involved in crime.
“When violators are found, they are taken to the Curfew Center and arrangements are promptly made to return them to the safety of their home. The Supreme Court and two Justices of the Appellate Division have found in favor of the City. We continue to believe in the effectiveness of the curfew and will proceed to argue for its legality in the New York State Court of Appeals.”
I’m undecided about the curfew but respect the judicial process and its decision I am annoyed with the bolded statement. The number of judges in favor is immaterial. The current state is the curfew unconstitutional.
So now what?
I agree with the Court on this one. I have always been opposed to the curfew because I see it as a violation of civil liberties and as treating a symptom rather than administering a cure. Many under-18s in the city work fulltime after school, and many work late into the night to support their families. For many hardworking young Rochester residents, the curfew is just another worry in their already stressful lives.
Also, the longterm solution to crime is obvious. Give young people a reason to be hopeful about their future, and do it by investing in education. The city should be investing in infrastructure and technology in the schools and giving teachers a pay raise. It will take at least a generation, but if we do it right, violent crime in the city can be finished.
There’s a subtle importance to Duffy’s statement about two of the five appellate judge’s supporting the City’s position. If my understanding of the State courts is correct, then the appellate decision must be split in order for the City to appeal to the State’s highest court. Had the ruling been unanimous, I think the City would have been barred from appealing this further in state court.
You have to show that in writing. You are saying that a unanimous vote from a higher court negates the plaintiff’s ability to appeal. Doesn’t seem the American legal way. Seems weird.
I believe that statement from Duffy, is a political statement attempting to case doubt on the legal process to justify an appeal.
We had similar arguments from Maggie Brooks about out of town Judges not understanding Rochester with the FAIR plan.
how can you be undecided? The city is spending a quarter of a million dollar to give police officers the permission to HARASS, handcuff, and transport kids away in the middle of the night. Regardless of how we individually feel about raising our kids, the city should not have a say if parents allow their kids to be out late for whatever reasons, including the ones Airbare8 pointed out.
BTW, cops are bringing in about 5 kids a week (quarter of a million remember) the majority of these kids are from single-parent households, and who work at night — which means these kids are not making it to school the next day — the curfew is inefficent, irresponsible and yes unconsitutional.
McFadden and Duffy think they are doing the people of the city of rochester a favor when instead they are teaching children that because they are young and black, they have less freedom than others.
That was a “toss away” comment meant to convey that I personally haven’t been following the impacts of the curfew. I should have worded it better. I’m not surprised at the points you bring to the table. Yes, resources could be better spent.