NYPD must release 2,700 documents on surveillance of Black Lives Matter activists, or say why it can't: judge

• A judge ruled that an NYPD argument for withholding facial recognition documents is invalid.
• Amnesty International and S.T.O.P. sued over access to records related to BLM surveillance. 
• The court ruled NYPD has to release 2,700 documents or specify why each one of them is exempt.

The New York Police Department must turn over 2,700 documents related to the surveillance of Black Lives Matter activists during the summer of 2020 — or explain in detail why it cannot, according to a recent ruling in New York Supreme Court.

Amnesty International and the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project sued the NYPD in July 2021 after the department denied a public records request for documents and emails related to the surveillance of activists.

The NYPD initially argued that an initial search for responsive records produced over 30 million emails and it would be "unreasonably burdensome" to comply with the request. 

On Friday, New York Supreme Court Justice Lawrence Love rejected their stance and ruled that the department must release to the groups any records not exempted under the state's public records law, Amnesty International announced. 

"New Yorkers demanding racial justice have a right to know the full details of NYPD's use of facial recognition technology during the BLM protests," Matt Mahmoudi, Amnesty International's Researcher on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, said in a statement to Insider. "This ruling recognizes that the NYPD broke the law in withholding this information and is a significant step in holding the NYPD accountable for its use of discriminatory surveillance."

Not an "unreasonable burden"

Following May 2020 police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, activists took to the street around the country to protest police violence. Demonstrations were held in New York City throughout the summer. 

On September 15, 2020, Amnesty International requested a list of documents related to the procurement of facial recognition, drones, gait recognition, and other surveillance technology between March 1, 2020 until September 1, 2020. 

The group also requested a list of all donated materials, equipment and funds from the New York Police Foundation to the NYPD between 2010 and 2020 as well as what was purchased with those funds. 

"The use of facial recognition and surveillance technology by the NYPD on residents of New York City and individuals protesting against police violence raises serious human rights concerns and may have a chilling effect on people's rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly," Amnesty International wrote in the request, which was viewed by Insider.

The NYPD — which has a history of monitoring Black Lives Matter protestors — denied the request, but the groups took the department to court. 

Lawyers for Amnesty International and the NYPD have met since and the groups have narrowed down what they're asking for to 2,700 documents, Love wrote, calling it "a far more reasonable number."

"Unfortunately, said list of documents is not before the Court and cannot be evaluated at this time," said Love.

Love ordered the groups to resubmit their public records request and for the NYPD to either turn over the documents or specifically identify which exemption prohibits the release of each one.

A spokesperson for the NYPD didn't immediately return an Insider email requesting comment on the ruling.

Following Friday's ruling, Amnesty International said in a statement that it and S.T.O.P. plan to use the records to investigate the NYPD's use of facial recognition technology throughout New York City.

Amnesty International has called for a total ban on the use, development, production, sales, and export of Facial Recognition Technology for mass surveillance purposes.

"It was wrong for the NYPD to surveil BLM protesters, and it was wrong to hide the evidence," S.T.O.P. Executive Director Albert Fox Cahn said in the statement. "When the police operate in the shadows and violate oversight laws, it's not only a threat to public safety, but to democracy."