A federal judge today revisited a decades-old court settlement restricting how the New York Police Department conducts surveillance after civil rights lawyers accused the department of breaking those rules by monitoring Muslims.
The dispute centers on the restrictions set by the Handschu decree, which was put in place in response to surveillance used against war protesters in the 1960s and '70s. The decree was relaxed following the September 11, 2001, terror attacks to allow police to more freely monitor political activity in public places.
"I've come to think of this case as a volcano that's asleep most of the time ... But every now and then blows up," US District Judge Charles Haight said at the start of a hearing in federal court in Manhattan.
The latest eruption stems from the NYPD's monitoring of Muslims, where they eat, study and worship as part of its counterterrorism efforts.
In February, civil rights lawyers filed papers seeking a court order barring further surveillance of Muslims without evidence of crimes and a court-appointed auditor to oversee police activities that were "flagrant and persistent".
The police measures directed at Muslims violate the Handschu decree "because they're not rooted in the fact that there's a criminal predicate," said plaintiff attorney Paul Chevigny. "They're rooted in the fact that the subjects are Muslims."
The city has countered by claiming that it closely observes the Handschu guidelines when making decisions about how to fight terror. A city lawyer, Peter Farrell, told the judge today that the department launches investigations based on evidence of legitimate threats, not religion.
"It's undeniable that New York City remains at the center of the threat by Islamists who have been radicalised to violence," he said.
The hearing was expected to last most of the day today. It was unclear when the judge would rule.
