Criminology Stop-and-Frisk Policing
by
Philip Levchak
  • LAST REVIEWED: 28 July 2021
  • LAST MODIFIED: 28 July 2021
  • DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195396607-0307

Introduction

Stop and frisk is a proactive policing strategy that is widely used by police departments across the globe. In the United States, the origins of stop and frisk are rooted in the English practice of allowing night watchmen to stop and question individuals who were deemed suspicious. This ability to stop and question suspicious individuals serves two primary purposes. First, it gives law enforcement officers the ability to identify individuals who are looking to engage in criminal activity, stop those individuals, and prevent them from committing a criminal offense. Second, it may have a deterrent effect if potential offenders refrain from criminal offending because they do not want to risk being stopped. By the early 20th century, the implementation of stop and frisk in the United States varied by state. The Uniform Arrest Act, proposed in 1942, sought to standardize the practice. While several states adopted the Uniform Crime Act, which stipulated the circumstances under which a stop and frisk could occur, most states failed to do so. The practice of stop and frisk also faced constitutional challenges, with plaintiffs alleging violations of the Fourth Amendment’s prohibitions against unreasonable searches and seizures. In 1968, the US Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of stop and frisk. When law enforcement officers can establish reasonable suspicion, they can stop and question an individual. If there is reasonable suspicion to believe that a stopped individual possesses a weapon or poses a threat, law enforcement officers can also conduct a frisk. Stop and frisk has faced significant criticism and has been the subject of several class-action lawsuits, particularly in New York City. First, there is significant concern that nonwhite pedestrians are more likely than white pedestrians to be stopped, frisked, and subjected to the use of force. Next, stop and frisk may reduce perceptions of legitimacy and trust in law enforcement. The practice may also have adverse health consequences for those who are subjected to it or are in fear of being subjected to it. Finally, it is unclear whether stop and frisk prevents crime. It is also important to note that stop and frisk faces these same criticisms in other nations. The literature cited in this article summarizes key pieces on stop and frisk.

History

In the United States, the practice of stop and frisk was deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court ruling in Terry v. Ohio (1968). In the decades that followed, many police departments reported an increase in their use of stop and frisk. A notable example is the New York City Police Department. The use of stop and frisk was meant to prevent crime and was based on the broken windows theory of policing described in Kelling and Coles 1996. White 2014 provides a comprehensive history of stop and frisk in New York City. The use of stop and frisk was met with criticism of how nonwhite individuals were often targeted for stops by law enforcement officers. Daniels, et al. v. City of New York, et al. (1999) and Floyd v. City of New York, et al. (2013) are two prominent class-action lawsuits that argued the New York City Police Department engaged in discriminatory stops and frisks. Schneiderman 2013 provides a descriptive summary of racial and ethnic disparities at various stages of the stop-and-frisk process, including arrests and sentencing outcomes. Fradella and White 2017 discusses the problems of stop and frisk and offers several solutions to reform it. Similarly, Purdon, et al. 2020 provides several suggestions on how to reform stop and frisk and how to incorporate its use into police practices that are known to be effective. For those seeking a more general history of stop and frisk, White and Fradella 2016 is a comprehensive text.

  • Daniels, et al. v. City of New York, et al. 99 Civ. 1695 (S.D.N.Y. 1999).

    Significant legal case related to stop and frisk in New York City. Plaintiffs alleged the New York City Police Department conducted stops and frisks without reasonable suspicion and that the department selectively targeted nonwhite pedestrians. The City of New York agreed to a settlement in 2003. Terms of the settlement included the public release of stop-and-frisk data.

  • Floyd v. City of New York. 959 F. Supp. 2d 540 (S.D.N.Y. 2013).

    Legal case related to stop and frisk in New York City. Plaintiffs alleged the New York City Police Department conducted stops and frisks without reasonable suspicion and that the department selectively targeted nonwhite pedestrians. The court ruled that the department engaged in a pattern of unconstitutional stops and frisks. The case was appealed and later settled. Subsequent public pressure led to significant declines in the number of stops conducted annually.

  • Fradella, Henry F., and Michael D. White. 2017. Reforming stop-and-frisk. Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society 18.3: 45–65.

    Traces the history and constitutionality of stop and frisk in the United States. Focuses primarily on New York City. The authors address the racial and ethnic disparities stemming from stop and frisk, and they propose several ways to reform stop and frisk.

  • Kelling, George L., and Catherine M. Coles. 1996. Fixing broken windows: Restoring order and reducing crime in our communities. New York: Martin Kessler Books.

    A detailed summary of broken windows theory. The authors discuss the roles of social and physical disorder in producing crime. This seminal work led to the adoption of stop and frisk as a strategy to reduce crime.

  • Purdon, James, White, Michael D., and Henry F. Fradella. 2020. Reforming stop and frisk for 21st century policing. In Critical issues in policing: Contemporary readings. 8th ed. Edited by Roger G. Dunham, Geoffrey P. Alpert, and Kyle D. McLean, 461–483. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

    The authors discuss the history of stop and frisk and the criticisms leveled against it. Importantly, the authors discuss how the careful selection of personnel, enhanced training, and the integration of stop and frisk into other police practices such as hot-spot policing, community-oriented policing, and problem-oriented policing can lead to stops and frisks that are more effective and less discriminatory.

  • Schneiderman, Eric T. 2013. A report on arrests arising from the New York City Police Department’s stop-and-frisk practices. New York: New York State Office of the Attorney General.

    A comprehensive report on stop and frisk issued by the New York State Office of the Attorney General. The report addresses racial and ethnic disparities in stop and frisk.

  • Terry v. Ohio. 392 U.S. 1 (1968).

    The US Supreme Court case that ruled stop and frisk was constitutional. Provides a legal rationale for when a stop and frisk does not violate the Fourth Amendment. Decided a stop was permissible when an officer had reasonable and articulable suspicion to believe an individual had committed a crime, was committing a crime, or was about to commit a crime.

  • White, Michael D. 2014. The New York City Police Department, its crime control strategies and organizational changes, 1970–2009. Justice Quarterly 31.1: 74–95.

    DOI: 10.1080/07418825.2012.723032

    A useful article for those interested in the history and structure of the New York City Police Department. The author discusses the rise of stop and frisk, its widespread usage, and the legal cases alleging its unconstitutionality.

  • White, Michael D., and Henry F. Fradella. 2016. Stop and frisk: The use and abuse of a controversial policing tactic. New York: New York Univ. Press.

    DOI: 10.1080/07418825.2012.723032

    A comprehensive history of stop and frisk. The authors address the possible costs and benefits. While there is an emphasis on New York City, the book also addresses stop and frisk in other locations.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login.

How to Subscribe

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here.

Article

Up

Down