The judge presiding over the case to decide whether the federal government should assume control of the city’s troubled jail system is directing the city to reach an agreement with critics on what a receivership would involve – a step that the city has so far resisted. The order represents the closest step yet toward a federal takeover of the jail.
The order came after Judge Laura Taylor Swain heard arguments Wednesday on whether the city was in contempt of court for failing to stop violence and excessive use of force. The contempt motion is an intermediate step toward federal receivership.
The city jail, known for its frequent slashings, drug problems and dysfunctional staffing, was sued by detainees in 2015 as part of an ongoing lawsuit, Nunez v. City of New York. Since then, the violence and officers’ use of force has only worsened. A federal monitor, Steve J. Martin, has documented a long list of ongoing violence.
Swain ordered the hearing back in July, citing her concerns regarding the implications of a federal receivership, saying “there’s not a lot of information about what a receivership could look like.”
During oral arguments, Swain noted the “magnitude” of appointing a federal takeover of a local jail. She also asked pointed questions as the city’s lawyer, Alan Scheiner, argued that conditions inside the jail were improving.
“We’ve been here before, we’ve been on that carousel before,” she said, citing nine years of the city promising to improve conditions inside the jails only to demonstrate what Swain called “backsliding.”
“There have been lots of good intentions,” she said, “but how long do I wait?”
Scheiner argued that last year’s appointment of Lynelle Maginley-Liddie as commissioner of correction showed the city’s commitment to improving jail conditions. He also cited reduced violence, efforts at hiring more staff and improved transparency.
He urged Swain to wait until November’s federal monitor report before issuing an opinion on the city’s contempt of court.
Swain appeared unimpressed, and at times, frustrated with the city’s attempt to discount what she called years of slashings, stabbings and fights as well as correction officers hitting detainees in the head.
“How do I stand down and forget history?” she asked Scheiner.
Lawyers arguing Wednesday to hold the city in contempt of court for failing to stop the violence — and ultimately federal receivership over the jail — include the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York and the Legal Aid Society, which represents people held at Rikers.
“We acknowledge an improved working relationship,” U.S. Assistant Attorney Jeffrey Powell said in his closing argument. He cited a recent monitor report that said improvement “moved at a glacial pace.”
Powell described “decades of practices,” which “trapped the department in dysfunction.” He added that not holding the city in contempt would be unfair because it allowed the city to “reset the clock” by appointing a third commissioner since 2015 to oversee the jails.
Swain said she would issue a written opinion on whether to hold the city in contempt for the unchecked violence in Rikers.
She then took the closest step yet toward a federal takeover of Rikers by ordering the city, the monitor and the plaintiffs to reach an agreement on what a receiver would look like, how it would work with the commissioner, what its powers would be, how long its tenure would last and what qualifications would be required.
It was a step that the Legal Aid Society has sought in the past, but one the city avoided. Swain gave the parties until Nov. 12 to reach an agreement.
Department of Correction officials declined to comment. A spokesperson for Mayor Eric Adams did not immediately return requests for comment.
Powell declined to comment, but appeared satisfied with his team as he left court.
“I would say it definitely showed receptivity,” Mary Lynne Werlwas, director of the Prisoners’ Rights Project at The Legal Aid Society said of Swain’s order. “She shared the concerns that any commissioner has a short tenure and won’t have the consistency that she and we have always thought is necessary here.”