A judge has rejected the settlement of a lawsuit triggered by the New York City police department’s surveillance of Muslims, on the grounds that the terms did not go far enough.

The settlement ruled upon was a January resolution of two cases, which stem from 2011 revelations that the NYPD was conducting widespread surveillance of Muslims that plaintiffs argued had violated their rights.

January’s settlement resulted in Mayor Bill De Blasio agreeing to appoint a civilian monitor of the NYPD’s counter-terrorism units, pending approval by a judge.

The presiding judge in the case, Charles S Haight Jr, agreed with the overall structure of the settlement but found that the powers of the civilian representative agreed upon in the settlement did not go far enough.

“The proposed role and powers of the civilian representative do not furnish sufficient protection from potential violations of the constitutional rights of those law-abiding Muslims and believers in Islam who live, move and have their being in this city,” Haight wrote in his ruling.

This means that a new settlement will have to be negotiated by the parties involved or take the matter to court.

Haight’s main contention in the negotiated settlement was the power and appointment of the civilian representative. The settlement stipulates the representative should report violations to the police commissioner, who is only obligated to investigate the incident, but Haight argued the representative should rather file quarterly reports to the court.

He also rejected provisions that the mayor should appoint the civilian representative and have the power to eliminate the position after five years.

The lawsuits arose following 2011 revelations that the NYPD, with help from the CIA, was using undercover informants to spy on Muslims throughout New York and New Jersey in mosques, religious bookstores, hookah bars and other places.

In his ruling, Haight also cited a recent report by the NYPD’s inspector general, an oversight body. The report examined the compliance by the department’s intelligence unit of the Handschu guidelines – a set of provisions designed to ensure the NYPD does not overreach when investigating political or religious groups. The report found the department has consistently violated several regulations by continuing investigations and using informants for extended periods without authorization. The report also highlighted in a footnote that 95% of investigations were launched against Muslims.

According to some watchdog groups and the OIG report, NYPD’s targeting of Muslims has continued despite the disbanding of the demographics unit, which was created in the wake of 9/11 and focused on monitoring Muslim communities.

The judge said the report described a near systematic failure on the NYPD’s to comply with these particular guidelines. NYPD officials characterized the report findings as vindication that they were complying with guidelines.

Haight was also the judge who ruled in favor of expanding the NYPD’s powers to allow it to act with less oversight post-9/11.

The plaintiffs in the cases are represented by several civil liberties groups, including the ACLU and the New York Civil Liberties Union, all of which received Haight’s ruling positively.

“The ruling is an opportunity to put stronger safeguards in place and we very much look forward to discussing the court’s suggestions with the NYPD and with the city,” said Ramzi Kassem, a law professor at CUNY School of Law, where he directs the Clear project. “Because we believe that this is in the interest of all New Yorkers, we hope that the reforms are implemented as soon as possible.”



The city law spokesman Nick Paolucci said they were disappointed the settlement was not approved.

“To the extent that the Court’s decision is based in part on an Inspector General’s report containing findings with which both the City and Class Plaintiffs’ counsel variously disagree, we are disappointed that the settlement was not approved as the parties originally proposed,” Paolucci said in a statement. “That said, we will explore ways to address the concerns raised by the Judge.”

Fahd Ahmed, executive director of Desis Rising Up & Moving, whose group has documented the ongoing surveillance by NYPD, said that even with the judge’s suggestions, the settlement does not go far enough as it largely depends on good faith from the police department which they have not earned.

“As the judge points out, and the inspector general report confirms, the NYPD has a long history of ignoring rules and disregarding court orders and their own procedures,” Ahmed said.