## Facts

- The United States filed a civil action against the State of New Jersey and the New Jersey State Police alleging a pattern or practice of racially discriminatory traffic stops, searches, and post-stop enforcement actions, especially affecting African American motorists on major roadways including the New Jersey Turnpike.
- The complaint alleged deficient policies and controls, including inadequate limits on trooper discretion, insufficient supervision and monitoring, and inadequate investigation and discipline in response to misconduct indicators and complaints.
- The United States brought the action under 42 U.S.C. § 14141 and 42 U.S.C. § 3789d(c)(3).
- Defendants denied engaging in any pattern or practice of unconstitutional or unlawful discrimination, but jointly sought entry of a consent decree to avoid litigation risks and burdens and to support lawful, nondiscriminatory traffic enforcement.
- The proposed decree included: limits on use of race and ethnicity in enforcement; documentation of traffic stops and post-stop actions; supervisory review of stop data; strengthened complaint intake and investigation; revised training; public reporting; Attorney General oversight mechanisms (including an office tasked with implementation coordination); and an independent monitoring structure.

## Issues

1. Whether the court should approve and enter a negotiated consent decree resolving the United States’ pattern-or-practice and Safe Streets Act claims through specified institutional reforms and court-supervised monitoring.

## Decision

- The court granted the parties’ joint application and entered the consent decree in late December 1999.
- The decree resolved all claims asserted in the complaint without an adjudication of liability.
- The decree established an independent monitoring team, later appointed by court order, and provided for ongoing reporting and court supervision.
- Court supervision and monitoring continued for years; the matter was ultimately closed after sustained implementation and oversight.

## Legal Principles

- Pattern-or-practice civil rights enforcement actions under 42 U.S.C. § 14141 and 42 U.S.C. § 3789d(c)(3) may be resolved through a court-enforceable consent decree imposing operational reforms and compliance monitoring without a finding of liability.
- A consent decree may prohibit reliance “to any degree” on race or national or ethnic origin in selecting vehicles for stops or determining the scope of post-stop actions, except when seeking a specific suspect where race or ethnicity is part of the description.
- Remedial provisions may require comprehensive stop documentation, supervisory review of enforcement patterns, strengthened misconduct complaint investigation and disposition, training revisions (including Fourth Amendment and cultural diversity topics), public reporting, and Attorney General-level oversight coordination.
- Independent monitoring and periodic reporting function as mechanisms to assess implementation, identify deficiencies, and support continued court supervision for the decree’s term and any compliance-based modification or termination.

## Conclusion

The district court entered a comprehensive consent decree that resolved federal claims of racially discriminatory traffic enforcement by requiring the New Jersey State Police to implement detailed nondiscrimination rules, data and supervisory controls, strengthened accountability and training systems, public reporting, and independent monitoring under continued court oversight, without a liability determination.


United States v. New Jersey, No. 99-5970 (MLC) (D.N.J. 1999)