ACLU-NJ Voices Concern on Body Camera Directive for Police

July 28, 2015
Share this:
Law Enforcement Body Cameras

NEWARK – Governor Chris Christie today announced an initiative to equip the New Jersey State Police with body-worn cameras, and provided state funding to help municipal police departments purchase the cameras. “The use of body-worn cameras will bolster trust and better provide for the safety and protection of residents and officers alike," Christie said.

The announcement included the release of a 24-page directive (PDF) to law enforcement from Attorney General John Hoffman that spells out policies and practices for the use of body-worn cameras.

Following is a statement attributable to Udi Ofer, Executive Director of the ACLU-NJ, about the use of body-worn cameras and the law enforcement directive:

“The Attorney General directive released today on police use of body cameras falls short of what’s needed to create police accountability in New Jersey.

“While it contains some important safeguards, it fails to address those very concerns that have triggered the public’s desire for body cameras in the first place. The public will not have a right to access the kind of footage—whether it's the chokehold used on Eric Garner or the arrest of Sandra Bland—that has sparked a conversation on police abuses.

“The Christie administration missed an important opportunity to create strong police accountability tools while also protecting the privacy and First Amendment rights of New Jerseyans.

“We have real concerns about several specific, key points:

  • Many important police interactions with civilians will not be recorded, including routine street encounters.
  • Public access to the recordings is too restrictive. For example, the subject of a recording isn’t guaranteed access to the recording.
  • Recordings may be kept indefinitely. That raises concerns about privacy, as well as First Amendment protections.”

Related Content

NJ is Wrong in Defending Taxpayer Grants to Yeshiva, Seminary

July 21, 2015
Share this:

Nearly $11 million for Construction Awarded to Two Schools Raises Concern About Discrimination, Use of Public Funds to Support Religious Mission

NEWARK – The ACLU of New Jersey, the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State submitted written arguments (PDF) challenging New Jersey’s rationale for awarding more than $11 million in taxpayer funds to two higher education institutions dedicated to religious training and instruction.

NJ Attorney General John Hoffman defended the state grants to the Lakewood Yeshiva Beth Medrash Gohova and the Princeton Theological Seminary in a brief dated June 10, 2015, in the lawsuit ACLU-NJ v. Hendricks. Hoffman argued that the grants are for academic purposes – the construction of classrooms, a library and other capital improvements – not furtherance of religious teachings and, therefore, do not violate the state Constitution or the Law Against Discrimination.

“The Constitution does not allow the State to subsidize the training of clergy or other religious instruction, nor does it allow subsidizing discriminatory institutions. The proposed grants would do exactly these things,” said Edward Barocas, legal director of the ACLU-NJ.

Responding to the state’s defense, groups filed a brief characterizing the State’s arguments as “unavailing” and an attempt to undermine a 1978 NJ Supreme Court ruling that clearly bars the use of public funds for the maintenance or support of religious groups. The brief asks the state Appellate Court to recognize the violations of the Constitution and bar the state from awarding the tax-funded grants to the schools.

“Taxpayers must not be forced to fund divinity schools," said Americans United Associate Legal Director Alex J. Luchenitser. “The court should strike down these grants.”

On April 29, 2013, following a competitive application process, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s administration released a list of 176 college construction projects to be funded with the proceeds from a voter-approved bond sale. The ACLU of NJ, ACLU and Americans United, went to court in June 2013 to challenge the funding under the state Constitution and the Law Against Discrimination.

“These grants flout important safeguards in the state Constitution,” said Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. “Taxpayers shouldn’t have to underwrite discrimination or the religious training of clergy.”


Even though the New Jersey Constitution forbids taxpayer funds from supporting ministries or places of worship, the state awarded $10.6 million to Beth Medrash Govoha, an orthodox Jewish rabbinical school in Lakewood, to build a new library and academic center. The state also awarded $645,323 to Princeton Theological Seminary for expansion and construction of classroom and study space.

Courses of study at both of these schools prepare students to serve as religious leaders or religious educators. The New Jersey Secretary of Higher Education’s website identifies each school as a “theological institution.” The Yeshiva does not admit women and its faculty is entirely male and Jewish. The seminary requires degree students to be Christian.


The ACLU-NJ, ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State went to court in June 2013 to challenge the funding under the state constitution and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. In their brief, the plaintiffs cited three violations of the state Constitution, which prohibits using taxpayer funds:

  • for the maintenance of any religion or ministry;
  • to subsidize or build facilities at which religious services or instruction will take place;
  • if such funding does not serve a public purpose.

Further, the brief cites the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD), which prohibits any place of public accommodation from discriminating based on religion or sex.

Because governmental entities are public accommodations subject to the LAD, they are prohibited from providing special benefits to organizations that discriminate based on religion or sex. The proposed grants constitute special benefits to two institutions that do exactly that. The Seminary has a policy of allowing only Christians to become degree students, faculty, or board members. While it has no formal policy barring women or non-Jews, the Yeshiva’s entire faculty is Jewish and male and the student body is all male and believed to be all-Jewish.

The State’s Response

Hoffman’s response argued that the 176 grants included awards to 15 private institutions and that the stated public benefit -- to improve the quality and capacity of higher education in New Jersey -- is not measured by each grant but rather by the entirety of the program. The state also said the grants were for the benefit of education not religious instruction, because the assistance is meant for classrooms, libraries and other academic functions.

Further, the State argued that schools with religious affiliations are not barred from taxpayer assistance, such as police and fire services, and that the plaintiffs’ assertion that the grants are violations is an overly broad interpretation of the state Constitution and the NJ Supreme Court’s findings in the landmark case, Resnick v. East Brunswick Township Board of Education.

Finally, the state argued in its written brief, “Religious institutions are expressly exempt from the LAD,” and that the State should not be barred from giving funds or other special benefits to organizations that are permitted to discriminate because they are exempt from the law.

The Plaintiffs’ Reply

Despite the state’s claim that the grants were plentiful and wide-reaching, the awards were made competitively, at the discretion of the State Secretary of Higher Education, and nearly a third of the applications for funding were rejected.

While the NJ Constitution does not preclude the State from providing general services such as fire and police protection to religious organizations, it does foreclose direct “out-of-pocket” funding for sectarian religious instruction and the training of clergy.

While religious institutions may be exempt from the LAD and therefore permitted to engage in discrimination, a place of public accommodation covered by the law (including the NJ government) is not permitted to indirectly promote or support such discrimination by providing special benefits to such discriminatory groups. Here, the State is providing the two institutions a total of more than $10 million in discretionary taxpayer funds.

Oral argument in the case has not yet been scheduled.

Related Content

Port Authority Now Covered by Open Records Law

June 30, 2015
Share this:
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Open Government

Governor Chris Christie late Monday signed legislation that for the first time requires the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey be subject to the New York Freedom of Information Law and the New Jersey Open Public Records Act. Christie signed the Senate concurrence of conditional vetoes he made in the original legislation, S2183/A3350. Christie’s signature comes six months after New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed companion legislation, and it was necessary for the law to take effect.

The following statement about the legislation is attributable to ACLU-NJ Legal Director Edward Barocas:

"This new law to make public records more open represents a positive step toward addressing significant and long-standing concerns about the lack of transparency and accountability at the Port Authority, deficiencies that were highlighted in the wake of the ‘Bridgegate’ lane-closure scandal. The law, which the ACLU-NJ supported, ensures that transparency protections will have the force of law and will provide a legal remedy to individuals when record requests are denied.

"While this law shines some disinfecting sunshine on the Port Authority, the work to transform this troubled bi-state agency is not done. The Port Authority is still left to its own devices regarding its public meetings. In order to make the agency more accountable, New Jersey and New York must enact a law that subjects the Port Authority to the same open meetings requirements that all state and local government bodies must follow, and individuals must be provided the right to challenge agency actions that violate those requirements."

Related Content

As Governor, Presidential Candidate Christie Earned Low Marks

June 30, 2015
Share this:
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie

ACLU-NJ Report Card Reflects Poor Performance in First Term

NEWARK – As New Jersey Governor Chris Christie prepares to announce his candidacy today for president of the United States, the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey (ACLU-NJ) reissued its report card on his first term in office.

Christie earned a grade of D+ for his record on civil liberties and civil rights. Now into his second term, Christie not only continues his poor performance, but raises new concerns about his record on key matters of constitutional rights.

“As Americans begin to consider candidates for the presidency, it is vitally important that they are informed about their candidates’ records on constitutional rights and freedoms,” said ACLU-NJ Executive Director Udi Ofer. “We hope that this guide will help voters become more informed about Governor Christie’s stance on key civil liberties and civil rights issues.”

The ACLU-NJ report card graded Christie on 12 crucial civil rights and liberties matters: freedom of expression, freedom of religion, separation of church and state, voting rights, women’s rights, immigrants’ rights, privacy, LGBT rights, criminal justice and drug policy, transparency, separation of powers, and economic justice.

“Governor Christie’s record on civil liberties and civil rights has been a poor one,” said Ofer. “Some of his most frustrating moments have been those times when he paid lip service to the protection of rights but failed to back up words with actions. For gay and lesbian New Jerseyans seeking to marry, sick patients in need of medical marijuana, or New Jerseyans seeking to learn basic information about their state government, the Christie administration has been a failure.”

Christie’s lowest grades were in the areas of transparency, separation of church and state, and separation of powers. The governor earned higher marks in other areas, such as freedom of religion. Following are some highlights (and lowlights).

  • Freedom of religion: Christie earned a solid B, his highest mark, particularly for his work to protect Muslim New Jerseyans from discrimination.
  • State involvement in religion: On the other end of the religion spectrum, Christie earned an F for giving away millions in state funds to two sectarian religious institutions that train clergy members.
  • Transparency: Christie earned a solid F for his record on transparency, despite campaigning in 2009 as the candidate who will bring accountability to Trenton. He fought against reforms to bring more transparency to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the bi-state agency at the epicenter of the Bridgegate scandal, and his administration routinely denies basic open records requests that the courts later overturn.
  • Criminal justice and drug policy: Christie’s record is a mixed one, earning him a C. He supported reforming the state’s broken bail system, as well as adding oversight to police acquisition of military equipment. However, he has dragged his heels implementing medical marijuana and more recently opposed an effort to regulate and tax marijuana, saying that as president he would prosecute individuals in the four states that have legalized marijuana for personal use by adults. During his time in office, New Jersey has made more than 100,000 arrests for marijuana possession.
  • LGBT rights: Christie fought against marriage equality, ending his opposition only when it became clear he would lose in court, earning him a D.
  • Immigrants’ rights: Christie supported giving undocumented immigrants a chance at college by signing the New Jersey Dream Act, but vetoed an important provision to open the doors fully by allowing them to apply for state financial aid.
  • Women’s rights: Christie has a mixed record. He slashed funding for women’s family planning centers, which has forced at least six clinics to close or fire staff. He did, however, sign into law a bill that protects women from pregnancy discrimination, as well as several measures aimed at closing the wage gap between men and women.

Christie’s second-term has raised other civil liberties and rights concerns. He has opposed early, in-person voting, dismissing it as an attempt at voter fraud despite the lack of evidence to support such claims. And eight months ago his administration issued an order requiring the detention of medical workers returning from one of three West African countries where they treated Ebola patients, even if they were asymptomatic. The decision was widely criticized by the medical community following the detention of a nurse, Kaci Hickox, at Newark Liberty International Airport. In the face of public pressure, he eventually released Hickox.

Finally, Christie has repeatedly stated that the Patriot Act does not violate civil liberties, despite the fact that numerous federal courts have found provisions of the Act to be unconstitutional and to violate civil liberties.

Related Content

ACLU of New Jersey Statement on Clashes between Police and Concertgoers at MetLife Stadium

June 8, 2015
Share this:

The following statement is attributable to ACLU-NJ Executive Director Udi Ofer:

Udi Ofer

“The incidents involving New Jersey police and concertgoers outside of the Summer Jam concert at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford last night raise serious questions about police practices. We are aware of reports of individuals throwing bottles at responding officers, but any time law enforcement deploy tear gas, sound cannons, armored personnel carriers and riot gear in a civilian context, civil liberties are put at risk and a closer look is required.

“The Attorney General’s office should appoint an independent investigator to determine and publicly report on what led to last night’s events, whether the event was properly managed and policed, how many injuries and arrests took place, and whether the tactics and force deployed by state troopers and potentially other law enforcement personnel were appropriate. The State Police should also release its Standard Operating Procedures for its deployment of the tactics and tools it used with concertgoers last night.

“The ACLU-NJ will continue to monitor information about last night’s incident as it becomes available.”

Newark Becomes First Municipality in New Jersey to Issue Identification Cards

May 21, 2015
Share this:

Immigrant communities cheer passage of City Council ordinance establishing Newark Identification card program to benefit undocumented immigrants, the homeless, and other vulnerable communities

NEWARK – The largest city in the state of New Jersey, with over 280,000 residents, has approved an ordinance to create a municipal identification card program for all city residents, making it the first municipality in New Jersey to do so. The Newark Municipal Council voted unanimously to create a city-issued ID eligible to all residents aged 14 and older. Newark Mayor Ras Baraka is expected to sign the ordinance soon.

The municipal ID card will benefit all residents of Newark, including marginalized communities such as immigrants, people with disabilities, the young and elderly, formerly-incarcerated people, the homeless, and transgender individuals.

The measure was backed by the New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice. The ACLU-NJ, a member of the alliance's executive committee, praised the leadership of the coalition and the city.

“Newark's ID card program is a bold step forward for public safety and civil rights,” said American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey Public Policy Director Ari Rosmarin. “It will help ensure all city residents have equal access to basic services and police protection. Newark’s tremendous leadership in promoting compassion and advancing justice should inspire municipalities across the state to follow its lead. We look forward to continuing to work with Newark to ensure that all residents—regardless of immigration status, gender identity, age, criminal history, or housing status—are able to use their Newark IDs to protect their rights and improve their lives.”

While Newark is the first municipality in the state to issue this form of identification, other cities around the country, including New Haven, New York City, and San Francisco, have instituted similar programs.

Highlights of the ID program include:

  • Identity and residency documentation requirements accessible to most Newark residents aged 14 and over
  • Valid proof of identification when interacting with all city agencies and departments, including the Newark Police Department, public schools, and Health & Community Wellness
  • Applicant confidentiality protections, including for domestic violence victims;
  • Plans to work with local banks to permit cardholders to open and close bank accounts, as well as plans to encourage card acquisition for prescription discount, and discounts on admission to local museums and other attractions and businesses
  • Anti-fraud design
  • Accessible application fee, with fee waivers for homeless and poor Newarkers

“This is a good day for Newark residents who are already part of our communities but lack documentation,” said Kevin Brown, 32BJ Vice President and New Jersey State Director. “Newark’s Municipal ID program will give immigrants, the homeless and other disenfranchised Newarkers more opportunities to improve their lives and build a bright future for their families.”

This form of identification provides peace of mind to residents in the city who are unable to obtain other forms of identification, including undocumented immigrants.

"The municipal IDs are a great step towards justice for immigrants, who work so hard but often need to stay in the shadows of fear," said Rev. Moacir Weirich, pastor of St. Stephen's Grace Community Church and a member of Faith In New Jersey. "With the IDs people will feel more secure and welcomed into our community where they live, work, and contribute."

Lacking a government-issued identification can discourage people from contacting police to report crimes or from participating as witnesses in criminal investigations. Victims of crimes are less likely to be identified, which can also hinder notification of their loved ones.

“The members and supporters of NJ Communities United applaud Mayor Baraka as he takes this step to ensure economic opportunities and public safety for immigrant families in Newark,” said Trina Scordo, Executive Director, New Jersey Communities United. “It is our hope that Newark will be the model for municipalities across the state in establishing human rights and dignity for immigrant communities.”

The most common form of government-issued identification is a driver's license. Both driver's licenses and non-driver state identification cards require proof of immigration status, preventing undocumented immigrants from obtaining them. Immigrants living in Newark will now be eligible to use a combination of documents verified by the City to obtain an official ID and use it in their everyday lives in Newark.

“We applaud the Mayor, the Council and the Mayor’s Office of International Affairs and Diaspora’s leadership,” said Alix Nguefack, Detention Program Coordinator, American Friends Service Committee. “This policy recognizes the fact that New Jersey is the state with the third largest immigrant population and that much of this population resides in the New York-Newark-Jersey City metropolitan area.”

The New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice launched a campaign in March, New Jersey For All, which aims to advance policies that address the lack of government-issued identification in the immigrant community, wage theft, the need for expanded access to driver's licenses, and the separation of immigrant families.

The Alliance views the passage of a municipal ID ordinance in Newark to be a great first step in the growing momentum from immigrant communities organizing to make New Jersey a more immigrant-friendly state.

NJAIJ Member Organizations: 1199SEIU | 32BJ SEIU | American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey | American Friends Service Committee | Catholic Charities Diocese of Metuchen | Catholic Charities Diocese of Trenton | Centro Comunitario CEUS | Community of Friends in Action | El Centro Hispanoamericano | Faith in New Jersey | First Friends NJ & NY | Haiti Solidarity Network of the North East | Hispanic Family Center of Southern New Jersey | Ironbound Community Corp. | La Fuente, a Tri-State Worker & Community Fund, Inc. | Make the Road New Jersey | National Association of Social Workers – NJ Chapter | New Jersey Communities United | New Jersey Policy Perspective | New Labor | Statewide Parent Advocacy Network, Inc. | Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of NJ | Wind of the Spirit

Policing in Camden has Improved, but Concerns Remain

May 18, 2015
Share this:
Camden County Police host President Obama

Data Suggest Significant Increases in Enforcement of Low-Level Offenses and Raise Questions About Accountability Systems

NEWARK — On his visit to Camden today, President Obama will hear in more detail about the successes of the recently formed Camden County Police Department, which has been lauded in many corners for its advances in community policing and a reduction in the impoverished city’s violent crime rate since it took over the city police department two years ago.

Chief Scott Thomson has been a national leader in promoting community policing, testifying before the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing earlier this year. “Community policing cannot be a program, unit, strategy or tactic. It must be the core principle which lies at the foundation of a police department's culture,” he said. “Community policing is not an option, it's an affirmative obligation."

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey agrees with Thomson about the importance of community policing. At the same time, the ACLU-NJ is concerned about the sharp increase in arrests and summonses for low-level offenses in Camden since the new force took over. An emphasis on making arrests and issuing tickets for activities like riding a bicycle without a bell, disorderly conduct, or failing to adequately maintain lights or reflectors on a vehicle are counter to the practice of community policing. The ACLU-NJ is also concerned about some of the data related to investigations of excessive force complaints by Camden residents.

“We value Chief Thomson’s public commitment to community policing and his prioritizing of community engagement, but we are concerned that the numbers in Camden have begun to tell a different story,” said ACLU-NJ Executive Director Udi Ofer. “The significant increase in low-level arrests and summonses, combined with what appears to be the absence of adequate accountability for excessive force complaints, raise serious concerns. The reality is that more people are being arrested for petty offenses, which is overwhelming the courts and has the potential to create a climate of fear, rather than respect, in the community."

Community policing is premised on building relationships and trust between police officers and the communities they serve. Focusing police resources on criminalizing minor misbehavior can lead to greater mistrust and a feeling of harassment by the police. Arrests and summonses for low-level offenses can have a spiraling effect that could lead to people losing their jobs, public benefits or immigration status. These sanctions can also result in hundreds of dollars in fines and a criminal record that makes it harder to get a job in the future.

“Aggressively enforcing low-level offenses will only serve to escalate tensions and make communities less safe,” said Ofer. “In a city plagued by poverty and disenfranchisement, funneling more people into our bloated criminal justice system harms families and communities and blunts the kind of community development that the people of Camden deserve.”

Ofer commended the new Camden County police force for emphasizing greater engagement with community members, patrolling the streets on foot rather than in cars, and in general building enhanced relationships. An example of the improved practices includes a reduction in police response times to an average of 4.4 minutes from a horrendous 60 minutes in the past.

But, Ofer added, “Before we hold Camden up as a model of community policing, we must address the troubling indicators that point to Camden’s use of practices that appear to take a page from a broken windows approach to policing. We know from cities across the country that broken windows policing often leads to distrust and alienation between communities and the police.”

Petty Offenses

The arrest and summons data, first reported by The Philadelphia Inquirer, for the first full year of the Camden County Police Department include the following examples, which compare the periods of July 2012 through June 2013 and July 2013 through June 2014 (the county force took over in May 2013):

  • Summonses for riding a bicycle without a bell or without a light increased from three to 339.
  • Summonses for disorderly conduct increased 43 percent, from 1,766 to 2,521.
  • Summonses for failure to adequately maintain lights or reflectors in a vehicle increased 421 percent, from 495 to 2,579.
  • Summonses for tinted car windows increased 381 percent, from 197 to 948.

Court Case Load

The marked increase in enforcement for low-level offenses has ballooned the Camden Municipal Court caseload by 29 percent. Unlike the Superior Court, which handles serious indictable offenses (felonies), the municipal court handles low-level arrests and summonses.

Nearly 125,000 cases were filed between July 2013 and June 2014 in Camden Municipal Court, up from 97,000 the previous year. In other words, even if every single Camden resident — adult and child — were hauled into Municipal Court, there would still be an additional 50,000 cases approximately. The volume has prompted the city to add a fourth judge, two public defenders, and a prosecutor. The court’s administrative staff has nearly doubled.

Adding tens of thousands of additional cases before the Camden Municipal Court will not make the City of Camden safer. For many years Camden has suffered from poverty and joblessness, and the city cannot arrest its way out of this problem. Funneling more people into the criminal justice system does more harm than good, as does imposing municipal court fines and fees on communities that can least afford them.

Excessive Force

The data also show 65 excessive force complaints filed against Camden police officers in 2014, an escalation from the number in previous years and the most complaints against any department in the state of New Jersey during the same period. The number of complaints exceeded the combined totals reported by the departments in Newark and Jersey City, the two biggest cities in the state with hundreds more officers.

In addition, according to reporting by The Philadelphia Inquirer, not one of the 65 excessive force complaints filed in 2014 has been sustained. The report suggests that the department has finished investigating 44 of the 65 complaints and dismissed all of them. The remaining 21 are pending. If true, such numbers raise serious concerns about systems designed to ensure accountability.


Thomson testified before President Obama’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, which made several recommendations for police departments, and Thomson is already in the process of implementing several of the recommendations. We encourage the Camden County Police Department to adopt, at the very least, these recommendations from the President’s Task Force:

  • Begin reporting data on a monthly basis on stop-and-frisk, summonses, use of force complaints, and arrest practices. The Newark Police Department adopted such a policy on stop-and-frisk reporting nearly two years ago and recently expanded that reporting to all summonses and arrests as part of its creation of a civilian review board to oversee the police department. We encourage Camden to do the same.
  • Adopt policies that discourage arrests or summonses for minor infractions.
  • Require police officers to provide their names to individuals they have stopped, along with the reason for the stop, the reason for a search if one is conducted, and a card with information on how to file a complaint in cases of wrongdoing.
  • Establish civilian oversight over its police department, which will strengthen trust with the community. A good model for Camden to adopt is the police civilian review board recently enacted by Mayor Ras Baraka in Newark.

ACLU-NJ Cheers Passage of Drone Privacy Bill in Assembly

May 14, 2015
Share this:

Legislation would require warrants and transparency for law enforcement’s use of drones in NJ

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey today applauded the overwhelming passage of A1039, a bill that would offer some of the strongest protections in the nation against abusive drone surveillance by law enforcement.

The bill would require police to obtain a warrant before using surveillance drones except in certain extraordinary situations, and it would require law enforcement to dispose of information within two weeks unless it’s being used for an ongoing investigation. Additionally, the legislation prohibits using drones as weapons in the state of New Jersey, and it requires law enforcement agencies to publicly report on their use of drones.

“Drone technology is expanding rapidly and the law needs to keep pace. This legislation is a critical starting point,” said ACLU-NJ Public Policy Director Ari Rosmarin. “Drones have remarkable capacity to gather information about New Jerseyans’ everyday lives, as well as the dangerous potential to encroach on our privacy. This legislation would add common-sense protections for when and how law enforcement can use drones in our state.”

A1039 was introduced by Assemblyman Dan Benson at the start of the legislative session. Similar legislation regulating drones passed the Senate and Assembly nearly unanimously in January 2014, only to be pocket-vetoed by Governor Christie. The bill today passed nearly unanimously in the Assembly, with 66 votes for the legislation, three abstentions and one vote against.

Twelve other states — Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Montana, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin — have passed drone privacy laws.

S2310, the bill’s companion in the Senate, was introduced by Senator Nicholas Sacco. The bill currently sits in the Senate Law and Public Safety Committee awaiting a hearing.

“The drones are coming. With no rules in place, law enforcement’s use of drones is a scary prospect,” Rosmarin added. “We urge the Senate to stand up for New Jerseyans’ rights and make sure that the drones that will soon fly through New Jersey skies do not become a privacy nightmare.”

The text of A1039 can be found here:

NJ Judge Rules Minors Cannot Receive Life-Long Sentences Without Consideration of Their Youth

May 11, 2015
Share this:

Man sentenced to de facto life sentence without parole will get new sentencing hearing that factors in his maturity at the time

NEWARK – In a groundbreaking ruling in an American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey case, a New Jersey judge found that people convicted of crimes as juveniles cannot be sentenced to de facto life without the possibility of parole without carefully considering the role their youth played in their crimes.

The case involved James Comer, who was sentenced at age 17 to serve 75 years in prison, more than 68 without parole. Essex County Superior Court Judge Thomas R. Vena in a ruling Friday, May 8, concurred with the ACLU-NJ that because Comer will be 86 years old when he first becomes eligible for a parole hearing, he had effectively been serving a life sentence. As a result of the ruling, Comer will be resentenced.

“The judge adopted the Supreme Court’s axiomatic observation that children are not just miniature adults. The unique nature of their brain chemistry requires that they be treated differently than adults,” said ACLU-NJ Senior Staff Attorney Alexander Shalom. “This ruling clearly affirms that before a court can condemn a child to die in prison, it must consider the things about youth that make these extreme sentences so ill-suited to juveniles.”

The ACLU-NJ argued that a series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions proscribed courts from sentencing minors to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, including de facto life sentences. Consistent with these cases, Comer’s resentencing will take into account the immaturity and impetuousness that accompanies youth; his home environment at the time; the circumstances of the offense, the deficiencies of young people in handling real-world functions, such as dealing with attorneys or police officers; and the possibility of Comer’s rehabilitation.

While the judge did not share the interpretation that the Supreme Court’s rulings amounted to an absolute rejection of life sentences of minors, the judge did rule that Comer’s sentence was unconstitutional because the judge failed to factor in the hallmark factors of youth involved in his crime.

“This ruling gets New Jersey courts one step closer to the reality that it is unconstitutional to sentence children to die in prison,” said Lawrence S. Lustberg of Gibbons P.C., who along with Joseph A. Pace, also of Gibbons P.C., represented Comer on behalf of the ACLU-NJ. “The question isn’t whether Comer deserves to be released – the question is whether Comer and other children charged with serious crimes deserve a meaningful opportunity to obtain release as they mature.”

Mr. Comer, now 31 years old, was sentenced in 2003 for his role in four robberies and a felony murder as a juvenile, with no meaningful consideration given to his youth at the time. Felony murder differs from murder in that if a murder is committed during the commission of a crime, everyone involved in that crime is deemed responsible for the murder, even though they did not actually kill or intend to kill. Although he was not the one who pulled the trigger, Comer received a longer sentence than his two accomplices, one who was charged with the actual killing and the other who was an adult.

The resentencing, which has not yet been scheduled, will take place in Essex County. The State plans to appeal Judge Vena’s decision. The decision is available at:;%2003-01-0231%20PDF.pdf

N-CAP Praises Newark Mayor for Establishing Civilian Review of Police Complaints

April 30, 2015
Share this:
Newark Mayor Signs Historic Order Creating Civilian Oversight of Police

Executive Order Creates a Strong and Independent Civilian Complaint Review Board that is a Model for other Cities

NEWARK -- Newark Communities for Accountable Policing (N-CAP) praised the Civilian Complaint Review Board established by the executive order of Mayor Ras Baraka today, citing it as one of the most progressive civilian police review boards in the nation and calling it a critical step in creating a transparent and accountable Newark Police Department.

The review board, as established by the executive order, empowers an 11-member panel to review complaints against the city’s police department, and provides the panel with subpoena power, the power to audit police policies and practices, and the authority to make sure discipline sticks when officers are found to have engaged in wrongdoing.

Members of the N-CAP steering committee enthusiastically endorsed the mayor’s actions, and called for Newarkers across the City to push to make sure the CCRB is codified in Newark law to outlast any one mayoral administration.

“As communities across the United States struggle with the daily injustices of police misconduct, Newark’s CCRB will prove to be a national model for creating strong and independent civilian oversight of the police,” said Udi Ofer, executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey. “We commend Mayor Baraka for working to transform the Newark Police Department and to make police accountability a reality in Newark. We look forward to continuing to work with Mayor Baraka and the municipal council to ensure that the CCRB has the resources it needs to succeed and that this institution of accountability lasts for generations to come.”

Newark communities have been calling for the creation of a civilian review board in Newark since clashes between police and residents of Newark during the 1960s. Today’s announcement is a realization of that decades-long struggle for accountability and justice.

“Today, history is being made. For far too long, the voices crying out for justice in Newark have not been heard,” said Lawrence Hamm, Chairman of the People’s Organization for Progress. “We will continue to work to ensure that this civilian review board is strong and independent, and holds the Newark Police Department to the highest standards of professionalism.”

As outlined in the executive order, the Civilian Complaint Review Board will be invested with much-needed authority, including the power to:

  • Investigate complaints of police misconduct. The board will be empowered, with subpoena authority, to investigate civilian complaints about NPD officers’ improper use force; unlawful searches, stops, and arrests; and even discourteous treatment, such as cursing or slurs relating to race, ethnicity, religion, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity, and other protected categories.
  • Ensure that disciplinary decisions stick. Only a “clear error” in the board’s investigation will allow the Police Director to reject a finding of fact from the board. The Police Director will retain ultimate disciplinary authority on the actions taken against an officer found to have committed wrongdoing, using a discipline matrix developed by the director and police unions, in consultation with the board.
  • Audit the department’s policies and practices, including investigations of patterns that reveal racial disparities in enforcement of laws, or any other issue of public safety or police-community relations

The N-CAP steering committee also called on the city to provide the necessary financial support for the board by creating a dedicated budget line in the city budget that will grow along with the police department and will provide adequate funding beyond the $500,000 set aside for start-up costs.

“Today marks a new chapter in Newark’s history, as we seek to move past decades of mistrust and tension between Newark residents and law enforcement,” said Milly Silva, executive vice president of 1199SEIU. “Thanks to Mayor Baraka’s leadership, Newark has become the national model for how a city can promote a culture of community involvement to confront deep-rooted problems. We are eager to continue working with city leadership to end unconstitutional policing on our streets and protect the civil rights and safety of all Newarkers.”

The board will be comprised of 11 members. The city’s Inspector General and three city council members will serve on the board, as well as seven board members recommended to the board by community-based organizations, including the ACLU of New Jersey, People’s Organization for Progress, Ironbound Community Corporation, NAACP New Jersey, Newark Anti-Violence Coalition, La Casa de Don Pedro and a representative of the clergy. Five out of the seven community-based organizations listed in the executive order are steering committee members or endorsing members of N-CAP. “Public safety is a civil right,” said Melvin Warren, Criminal Justice Chair of the NAACP New Jersey State Conference.

“We are encouraged by this important step in addressing the challenge of building trust between the community and law enforcement. Establishing a well-crafted review mechanism will help to ensure fair and effective policing for the people of Newark. With this effort, Newark has an opportunity to serve as a model for community-responsive policing throughout New Jersey and the nation,” said Ryan P. Haygood, the President & CEO of the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice.

In addition to the investigatory powers, the executive order also creates an obligation for the board to conduct public meetings, publish public reports on its work, including the type and disposition of the complaints it receives, as well as make public robust data about policing practices in Newark, including stop-and frisk activity, arrest activity, use of force activity, and information about money paid by the NPD to in judgements or settlements of lawsuits filed against the department for civil rights violations.

“This is great day for our beloved City of Newark,” said Rick Robinson of the NAACP-Newark, NJ Branch. “Newark’s Mayor, Ras J. Baraka and Newark’s Police Director, Eugene Venable, deserve a tremendous amount of credit for demonstrating strong leadership and embracing the concept of fundamental fairness that will prove to be meaningful in the Civilian Complaint Review Board. The NAACP-NNJB believes that Newark residents will now have much-needed components, including accountability and transparency, to examine complaints of misconduct behavior by the Newark Police Department.”

"Garden State Equality feels strongly that police accountability is an LGBT issue, and we're proud to see this advance for justice. Kudos to all the generations of activism that made this possible," said Andrea Bowen, executive director of Garden State Equality.

Newark Communities for Accountable Policing is a movement to build a respectful, accountable and transparent Newark Police Department. Steering Committee members include: 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, Ironbound Community Corporation, Garden State Equality, NAACP New Jersey State Conference, Newark NAACP, New Jersey Communities United, New Jersey Institute for Social Justice, Newark LGBTQ Community Center, and People’s Organization for Progress.

WebSanity Top Secret