A common cry in Lansingburgh these days – outside of
“call 911!” – is “we want a curfew.” Or, better put, “we want the curfew on the
books enforced” to help combat the recent spate in crime that includes
stabbings, arsons, open air drug deals, prostitution and gang activity and
general unruliness.But, said Police Chief John Tedesco and Councilman Jim Gordon, R-District 1, the curfew as it’s written is unconstitutional. It might be. I have no idea. Troy’s law, implemented in 2004, has never been tested in court but with some tweaking, according to former Councilman Kevin McGrath, it could be in line with curfews that have withstood judicial scrutiny.
Regardless, the fact remains, if police wanted to enforce
a curfew, they could and then have it tested in court later. Police didn’t
worry about constitutionality when they were arresting people for not having a
bell or a light on their bikes or for jaywalking – just so happens more than 90
percent of those arrested were black or Hispanic. And they didn’t worry about
the Constitution when the Street Crimes Unit was out harassing anyone who they
even suspected of being up to no good.
 |
| MCGRATH |
But, police don’t want to be babysitters. That’s the
bottom line. I can’t say as I blame them but when more than 200 people show up
at a neighborhood watch meeting, something is wrong.
If constitutional rights are a concern, however, there
are some tweaks to Troy’s law that would satisfy any concerns because they have
been tested in court, according to McGrath.
“Juvenile curfews are legal in New York,” McGrath said.
“It’s unfortunate Lansingburgh’s councilman is telling constituents otherwise.”
Gordon said McGrath had four years on the Council to do
something about it. He added and he’s “had conversations with people about
this” and will be looking into it.
In general, curfews, like Troy’s, that are too broad have
been found unconstitutional by the federal courts. While generalities like not
discriminating against color, gender or ethnicity are required, exceptions are
needed too to protect First and Fourth Amendment rights. Those with the right
balance, like the curfew in Dallas, Texas have withstood judicial scrutiny.
For example, Troy’s is broad enough by requiring anyone under 18 years old to be off the
streets and any other public areas between the hours of 10:30 p.m. and 6 a.m.
Sunday through Thursday and 11:30 p.m. through 6 a.m. Friday and Saturday.
 |
| GORDON |
But, when compared to the curfew in Dallas, Troy’s
doesn’t offer enough exceptions. In Dallas, where the curfew applies to anyone
under 17, those who are married or have ever been married are exempt.
Other scenarios that excused anyone under 17 years old
from the curfew in Dallas include:
-Those accompanied by a parent or guardian or were on an
errand for a parent or guardian.
-If they were traveling to or from employment or engaged
in an employment related activity.
-Minors who were attending school, a religious or organizational
function or in the general exercise of their First Amendment right of Freedom
of Speech and the right to assemble.
 |
| TEDESCO |
-Minors are also allowed to engage in interstate travel
or remain on the sidewalk in front of their home or a neighbor’s home.
-It also permitted minors from moving about in public
areas in the case of an emergency.
Troy’s is similar in that it allows exemptions for
employment, religious and school functions and emergencies but it does not
include minors accompanied by a parent or guardian or minors out with the
permission of a parent or guardian.
Also, in Dallas, police are required to ask the age of
the apparent offender and ask them what they are doing out after hours. That
would work well anywhere because once a cop asks a group of teens what they are
doing the answer 99 percent of the time is “nothing.” I’m guessing about 3 to 5
percent of the time it’s more like “nothing, pig.” All the teens have to say is
“holding a prayer service,” which, of course, is far from what any group of teens
are doing in Powers Park at 1 a.m. but all they have to do is say it and they
are exempt from the law.
A curfew law In Rochester was struck down by the state’s
highest court, the Court of Appeals. But, the court said the city failed to
provide enough evidence that such a curfew was in fact necessary.
Tell that to people in The ‘Burgh.
