A controversial portion of New York City’s anti-chokehold law — dubbed the “diaphragm law” — was struck down Tuesday as “unconstitutionally vague” by a judge in Manhattan, according to new court documents.
The ruling, handed down by Supreme Court Justice Laurence Love, is the latest development in a nearly 11-month legal battle waged by a coalition of 18 police unions.
The unions have been challenging a section of the new law that prohibits maneuvers that would press a suspect’s diaphragm.
In siding with them, Love found that the unions “have demonstrated that Section 10-181 is unconstitutionally vague as the phrase ‘compresses the diaphragm’ cannot be adequately defined as written.”
“It is this Court’s sincere hope that the New York City Council will revisit this issue to address this vital matter,” he added.
A law department spokesperson said, “The City is reviewing its legal options.”
The clause, a more restrictive ban on chokeholds passed by City Council and signed into law last July by Mayor de Blasio, allowed prosecutors to file misdemeanor charges against cops if they used any move during an arrest that restricted the person’s breathing “in any way.”
The unions argued it “criminalize[d] the lawful use of force” while threatening the safety of New Yorkers.
The anti-chokehold bill was signed into law in response following the death of George Floyd, who was pinned under former Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin’s knee for nearly 10 minutes.
The ban on chokeholds sparked outrage from nearby police agencies, which told their cops not to arrest anyone in the Big Apple.
Prosecutors in the Big Apple also raised concerns about the “diaphragm law,” with Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance Jr. saying he didn’t think it would hold up in court.