January, 20 2010, 10:04am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Will Matthews, ACLU national, (212) 549-2582 or 2666; media@aclu.org
Jennifer Carnig, NYCLU, (212) 607-3363 or (845) 553-0349; jcarnig@nyclu.org
ACLU Lawsuit Challenges Abusive Police Practices In New York City Schools
NYPD Officers Routinely Subject Schoolchildren To Excessive Force And Wrongful Arrests
NEW YORK
New
York Police Department personnel assigned to New York City's public
schools have repeatedly violated students' civil rights through
wrongful arrests and the excessive use of force, according to a class
action federal lawsuit filed today by the American Civil Liberties
Union, the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) and the law firm
Dorsey & Whitney LLP.
The landmark lawsuit challenges the
conduct and behavior of police officers and school safety officers
(SSOs) serving in the NYPD's School Safety Division. It was filed on
behalf of five middle school and high school students who were
physically abused and wrongfully arrested at school by NYPD personnel.
The plaintiffs seek system-wide reform in New York City's middle
schools and high schools.
"Aggressive policing is stripping
thousands of New York City students of their dignity and disrupting
their ability to learn," said Donna Lieberman, Executive Director of
the NYCLU. "We all want safe schools for our children, but the current
misguided system promotes neither safety nor learning. Despite mounting
evidence of systemic misconduct by police personnel in the schools, the
NYPD refuses to even acknowledge any problems with its school policing
practices. We are confident that the courts will compel much-needed
reform."
Plaintiff Daija, 13, is an
eighth-grade student at Lou Gehrig Middle School in the Bronx. On
October 7, 2009, Daija was unlawfully arrested by SSOs following a
confrontation in front of her school initiated by two adult strangers
who had threatened her. An SSO instructed Daija to go into the school
with the strangers. Frightened, Daija told the SSO that she preferred
to wait outside for her mother who was coming to pick her up.
In response, the SSO grabbed Daija
by the arm, handcuffed her, forcefully threw her down and pinned her to
the ground. Daija sat handcuffed at a desk until her mother managed to
find her. No charges were filed against her. Daija required medical
attention as a result of the assault.
"I feel unsafe at school," said
Daija. "I'm afraid that School Safety Officers could attack me again
for no reason. I just want the school year to be over so I can be a
normal kid again. I shouldn't have to be scared of school."
The lawsuit maintains that
inadequately trained and poorly supervised police personnel engage in
aggressive behavior toward students when no criminal activity is taking
place and when there is no threat to health and safety. The police
confront and arrest students over minor disciplinary infractions such
as talking back, being late for class or having a cell phone in school.
The lawsuit documents numerous incidents in which students engaged in
non-criminal conduct were handcuffed, arrested and physically assaulted
by police personnel at school.
The aggressive policing in the
city's schools contributes to the school-to-prison-pipeline, a
disturbing national trend wherein students are funneled out of the
public schools and into the juvenile and criminal justice systems.
These children tend to be disproportionately Black and Latino, and
often have learning disabilities or histories of poverty, abuse or
neglect.
"If you treat children like
criminals, they will fulfill those expectations," said Catherine Y.
Kim, staff attorney with the ACLU Racial Justice Program. "Aggressive
policing in public schools undermines efforts to create a nurturing and
supportive environment for children, and without strict accountability
and transparency, too many at-risk youth fall through the cracks and
are denied equal educational opportunities."
Since the NYPD took control of
public school safety in New York City in 1998, more than 5,000 SSOs,
civilian NYPD employees assigned to the schools, and nearly 200 armed
police officers have been assigned to the city's public schools. There
are more police officers patrolling New York City schools than make up
the entire police forces in Washington, D.C., Detroit, Boston,
Baltimore, Dallas, Phoenix, San Francisco, San Diego or Las Vegas. The
number of police personnel assigned to patrol New York City public
schools has grown by 73 percent since the transfer of school safety to
the NYPD, even though school crime was declining prior to the 1998
transfer and even though student enrollment is at its lowest point in
more than a decade.
SSOs wear NYPD uniforms and possess
the authority to stop, frisk, question, search and arrest students.
While NYPD police officers must complete a six-month training course
before being deployed, SSOs receive only 14 weeks of training before
being assigned to schools. School administrators have no supervisory
authority over the SSOs who patrol their schools.
"When one of our clients was 11
years old, she was handcuffed and perp-walked into a police precinct
for doing nothing more than doodling on a desk in erasable ink.
Amazingly, no one in the police department or the school seemed to
think there was anything wrong with that," said Joshua Colangelo-Bryan,
senior attorney at Dorsey & Whitney and co-counsel on the case.
"It's a sad day when you need to resort to a lawsuit to keep an
11-year-old from being arrested for drawing on her desk, but in this
case it is clear there is no alternative."
From 2002 to June 2007, the NYPD
Internal Affairs Bureau received 2,670 complaints against members of
NYPD's School Safety Division - about 500 complaints annually - even
though no effective or publicized mechanism exists for lodging
complaints against school safety officers. Families that have lodged
complaints against SSOs have reported that, in response, the NYPD
simply transfers those SSOs to different public schools. Additionally,
the Civilian Complaint Review Board, which investigates allegations of
police misconduct, has reported that the NYPD receives about 1,200
complaints a year about SSOs.
Today's lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, seeks the following remedies:
A return of disciplinary decisions traditionally dealt with by school administrators to New York City's school administrators.
Mandatory training of SSOs regarding
conduct relating to arrests, searches and the use of force. Officers
must get training for working in an educational environment and must be
taught the difference between the penal code and the disciplinary code
when it comes to arresting students.
A transparent and meaningful
mechanism for students and parents to file complaints against members
of the NYPD's School Safety Division.
Revision of the policies and
procedures regarding discipline of members of the NYPD's School Safety
Division who are found to have committed abuses, including their
removal from having future contact with youth where appropriate.
A copy of today's complaint is available online at: www.aclu.org/racial-justice/bh-v-city-new-york-complaint
Additional information about the case is available online at: www.aclu.org/racial-justice/bh-v-city-new-york
Additional information about the ACLU's work to combat the school-to-prison-pipeline is available at: www.aclu.org/stpp
Additional information about the New York Civil Liberties Union is available online at: www.nyclu.org
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
After Judge Tosses GOP Lawsuit, Missouri Voters Submit Signatures for Referendum on Rigged Map
"The citizens of Missouri have spoken loudly and clearly: They deserve fair maps, not partisan manipulation,” said one campaigner.
Dec 09, 2025
Opponents of Missouri's GOP-rigged congressional map on Tuesday submitted more than twice the required number of signatures supporting a referendum on the redistricting scheme backed by US President Donald Trump, a move that followed a federal judge's refusal to block the initiative.
The political action committee People Not Politicians turned in more than 300,000 signatures in support of the referendum to Republican Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins' office in what the group called an "unprecedented show of grassroots power."
The submission—which filled 691 boxes—will be reviewed by state election officials tasked with certifying the validity of the roughly 110,000 signatures required for qualification on the November 2026 ballot. If the signatures are approved, the state would be temporarily prohibited from adopting the new map until after the referendum vote.
Hoskins initially rejected People Not Politicians' referendum petition because Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe, a Republican, had not yet signed the redrawn map into law. Hoskins said he would reject any signatures collected before Kehoe approved the map in September. At that time, People Not Politicians had collected around 92,000 signatures.
“The citizens of Missouri have spoken loudly and clearly: They deserve fair maps, not partisan manipulation,” People Not Politicians executive director Richard von Glahn said in a statement. “We are submitting a record number of signatures to shut down any doubt that Missouri voters want a say.”
The submission followed a Monday ruling by US District Judge Zachary Bluestone—a Trump appointee—rejecting Republican Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway's bid to block the referendum on grounds that the court had no jurisdiction over a lawsuit filed by Hoskins and the GOP-controlled state Legislature arguing that state referendums on congressional maps are unconstitutional.
Supporters of Missouri's referendum are seeking to block redistricting legislation passed in September as part of Trump's push for Republican-controlled state legislatures to rig congressional maps in a bid to preserve GOP control of Congress by eliminating Democratic-leaning districts.
Texas was the first state to do Trump’s bidding by approving a new congressional map that could help Republicans gain five additional House seats. Last week, the US Supreme Court's right-wing majority gave Texas Republicans a green light to use the rigged map in next year's election.
Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom responded to Texas' move by spearheading a successful ballot initiative to redraw the Golden State's congressional map in favor his party. Under pressure from Trump, Republican lawmakers in Indiana, Missouri, and North Carolina launched their own gerrymandering efforts.
In Missouri, Republicans are aiming to win seven of the state's eight congressional seats, including by flipping the 5th District, which is currently held by Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver.
Responding to Tuesday's signature submission, Missouri state Rep. Ray Reed (D-83) said on social media that "today, the people of Missouri did something powerful. Organizers across our state: young folks, retirees, faith leaders, neighbors talking to neighbors, came together to defend the idea that in a democracy, voters should choose their leaders, not the other way around."
"Missouri just showed the country what fighting back looks like and I’m proud to stand with the people who made it happen," Reed added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's Billionaire Education Secretary Makes 'Backroom Deal' to Shaft Low-Income Borrowers
Amid a cost-of-living crisis, millions of low-income borrowers may now be forced to spend several hundred more dollars a month paying for student loans.
Dec 09, 2025
As student debt exacerbates the financial struggles of millions of Americans, the Trump administration has taken a major step toward killing the Biden administration's student loan forgiveness program.
On Tuesday, the Department of Education announced that it had reached a settlement with the state of Missouri to end the Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) program, which allowed more than 7 million mostly low-income Americans to reduce their federal student loan payments.
Rather than setting monthly payments based on income, the SAVE program bases them on how much borrowers earn and the size of their families, which is referred to as an income-driven repayment option, or IDR. SAVE cut most enrollees' monthly loan payments in half and left 4.5 million of them, mostly those earning between 150–225% of the federal poverty level, paying $0 per month.
In March 2024, a coalition of 11 states led by Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach sued in federal court to stop the SAVE plan. The next month a similar lawsuit was filed by another coalition of seven states led by Missouri's former attorney general, Andrew Bailey.
In February, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the states, blocking 8 million borrowers from accessing lower payments under the program. Now President Donald Trump's administration which aggressively opposes student loan forgiveness, has agreed to settle the lawsuit, effectively killing SAVE.
“For four years, the Biden administration sought to unlawfully shift student loan debt onto American taxpayers, many of whom either never took out a loan to finance their postsecondary education or never even went to college themselves, simply for a political win to prop up a failing administration,” said Undersecretary of Education Nicholas Kent. "The Trump administration is righting this wrong and bringing an end to this deceptive scheme. The law is clear: if you take out a loan, you must pay it back."
The settlement also includes a provision requiring that, for the next 10 years, the Department of Education notify the state of Missouri at least 30 days in advance before instituting broad-based student debt relief.
As the Debt Collective, a membership-based debtors' union, explained in a post on social media: "30 days is enough notice that Missouri will find standing to sue for relief before it even happens. So not only is Trump gutting the SAVE plan, they're essentially putting a moratorium on cancellation for the next 10 years with this agreement."
"What Republicans admit is that the executive administration does have authority to cancel federally held student debt," the group added. "They just want to make it so that it will be administratively and practically impossible to deliver it because of this technicality. It's stealing in advance."
SAVE was already slated to end in 2028 following July's passage of Republicans' One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which replaced it with a pair of less generous income-based repayment plans that require many debtors to pay hundreds more per month. The deadline to switch to one of the new plans will now move up, though the administration has not yet clarified when borrowers will have to switch.
The Debt Collective predicted that the end of SAVE "means many more debtors will likely be forced to default on their loans," which the group added "is bad for millions of families and our economy."
According to an analysis of federal student loan data from the American Enterprise Institute, a libertarian think tank, more than 12 million borrowers in the US are already in default or otherwise behind on their student loan payments.
Since their introduction, former President Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness policies have been chipped away at bit by bit through litigation. In 2023, the conservative US Supreme Court struck down the administration's plans to forgive up to $20,000 in student loan debt for millions of Americans, ruling that the plan exceeded the administration's executive authority. A year later, it halted SAVE as well while it considered the merits of the Missouri lawsuit.
The group Protect Borrowers, which supports student loan forgiveness, argues that SAVE is "not a novel use of executive power," noting that Congress gave the Education Department the authority to create IDRs in 1993 and that several other programs have been created since.
"This settlement is pure capitulation—it goes much further than the suit or the 8th Circuit order requires," said Persis Yu, the group's deputy executive director and managing counsel. "The real story here is the unrelenting, right-wing push to jack up costs on working people with student debt.”
A September survey by Data For Progress found that student loans make it more difficult for many borrowers to keep up with other bills amid a growing cost-of-living crisis: 42% of respondents said their debt payments had a negative impact on their ability to pay for food or housing. More than a third, 37%, said it had a negative impact on their ability to cover healthcare costs for themselves or their dependents, while the majority, 52%, said it had a negative impact on their ability to save for retirement.
“While millions of student loan borrowers struggle amidst the worsening affordability crisis as the rising costs of groceries, utilities, and healthcare continue to bury families in debt," Yu said, "billionaire Education Secretary Linda McMahon chose to strike a backroom deal with a right-wing state attorney general and strip borrowers of the most affordable repayment plan that would help millions to stay on track with their loans while keeping a roof over their head."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Leads Call for Senate to Force RFK Jr. to Answer for 'War on Science'
"Failure to conduct an oversight hearing on Secretary Kennedy's actions would be an abdication of our responsibility—both from a moral perspective and as a matter of sound public health policy."
Dec 09, 2025
On the heels of a federal panel appointed by US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. voting to reverse a recommendation that newborns receive the hepatitis B vaccine, Sen. Bernie Sanders led a Tuesday call for the HHS leader to be hauled before a relevant congressional committee to answer for his actions that "undermine the health and well-being of the American people and people throughout the world."
In a letter signed by Democrats on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee and Sanders (I-Vt.), its ranking member, the lawmakers wrote to Republican Chair Bill Cassidy (La.), a medical doctor, to argue that "Kennedy has waged an unprecedented war on science and vaccines that have saved millions of lives," and demand his testimony.
The letter highlights Kennedy directing the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention "to publish false information on its website suggesting that childhood vaccines cause autism," ousting a CDC director "who refused to rubber-stamp his dangerous and unsubstantiated" recommendations, spreading misinformation about the measles vaccine during an outbreak, and defunding research "that will leave us woefully unprepared for future pandemics and public health emergencies."
Kennedy has also "packed a critical scientific body, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), with vaccine deniers, completely upending the rigorous scientific process for reviewing and recommending vaccines to the public despite a commitment he made to you that ACIP would be 'maintained without changes,'" the letter continues, citing last week's hepatitis B vote.
"Mr. Chairman: Holding an oversight hearing on Secretary Kennedy’s ill-conceived actions is more important now than ever," argued Sanders and Democratic Sens. Angela Alsobrooks (Md.), Tammy Baldwin (Wis.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (Del.), Maggie Hassan (NH), John Hickenlooper (Colo.), Tim Kaine (Va.), Andy Kim (NJ), Ed Markey (Mass.), Chris Murphy (Conn.), and Patty Murray (Wash.).
"Under Secretary Kennedy;s leadership, over 1,700 people have been infected with measles. Whooping cough cases are surging nationwide, and concerns about a severe flu season continue to grow. Vaccination rates across the country are falling. Children are dying from illnesses that vaccines could have prevented," the senators stressed.
"Secretary Kennedy's response to these crises has been to spread misinformation, end campaigns encouraging flu vaccinations, fire officials who disagree with him, and place individuals with significant conflicts of interest in positions of power—completely undermining Americans' faith in our nation's public health institutions," they wrote.
The senators pointed out that "dozens of scientific and medical groups" have called for Kennedy's resignation or removal, as have more than 1,000 current and former HHS staffers. They also noted a September warning from nine former CDC directors that the secretary "is endangering every American's health," a similar joint statement the following month by ex-surgeons general, and another this month from a dozen previous Food and Drug Administration commissioners.
The letter also references Cassidy's comments about ACIP, the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, and Kennedy's supposed commitment during the confirmation process to come before the HELP Committee on a quarterly basis, which hasn't happened.
"Failure to conduct an oversight hearing on Secretary Kennedy's actions would be an abdication of our responsibility—both from a moral perspective and as a matter of sound public health policy," the letter argues, calling for his testimony as soon as possible.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


