Sam Feldman

@srfeld

Appellate public defender, trade unionist, NYC-DSA member. Washingtonian by birth, Chicago alum. He/him. Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.

934 Folgt1.377 Follower1.309 Posts

Bluesky

Ist das dein Profil?Übernimm es — dann gehört dir srfeld.dirty.social.Profil übernehmen

Sam Feldman@srfeld· 29d

That was in 2013. In 2022, the NY legislature finally changed the law...sort of. Motivated by racial justice concerns, the legislature passed a bill "to reduce the number of traffic stops for minor, non-moving violations." But they didn't legalize any stickers or actually restrict police stops.

JUSTIFICATION:
One of the most common interactions that people have with law enforcement occurs during traffic stops. Often, however, there is a disparity in who is being stopped, especially for minor violations. According to 2020 research published by The Stanford Open Policing Project, of a dataset of nearly 100 million traffic stops carried out across the United States, black drivers were about 20 percent more likely to be stopped than white drivers relative to their share of the residential population. The study also found that once stopped, black drivers were searched about 1.5 to 2 times as often as white drivers. As has been painfully demonstrated over the past few years in the news, these stops for minor violations have led to motorists dying at the hands of the police. This bill is intended to reduce the number of traffic stops for minor, non-moving violations such as stickers on vehicle windows and objects placed or suspended in or on the vehicle, thereby reducing the possibility of a tragic outcome from such traffic stops.

Redline showing the following was added after "(i) The use or placing of posters or stickers on windshields or rear windows of motor vehicles other than those authorized by the commissioner, is hereby prohibited.": "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a summons for operating a motor vehicle in violation of this subparagraph shall only be issued when there is reasonable cause to believe that the person operating such motor vehicle has committed a violation of the laws of this state other than a violation of this subparagraph."

Sam Feldman@srfeld· 29d

This was a "pretext stop," which had once been illegal in NY. But in 2001, the NY Court of Appeals had followed SCOTUS in holding the officer's motivation irrelevant: if the stop is "objectively reasonable," it's fine. One judge argued this stop, for a common little sticker, wasn't reasonable.

PIGOTT, J. (dissenting in part).
While I concur with the majority's Confrontation Clause analysis, I part company with it on the reasonableness of the police officer's initial stop of defendant. The suppression court ruled that the police officer lacked probable cause to stop the defendant but for the fact that defendant had a Finger Lakes Community College sticker in the rear window (police officer: “I can't recall what side it was on, the left or the right”).
Prior to 2001, all four Departments of the Appellate Division uniformly held that evidence obtained as a result of pretext stops was inadmissible (see People v. Young, 241 A.D.2d 690, 660 N.Y.S.2d 165 [3d Dept.1997]; People v. Roundtree, 234 A.D.2d 612, 651 N.Y.S.2d 615 [2d Dept.1996]; People v. Laws, 213 A.D.2d 226, 623 N.Y.S.2d 860 [1st Dept.1995]; People v. Camarre, 171 A.D.2d 1002, 569 N.Y.S.2d 223 [4th Dept.1991] ). Then, in People v. Robinson, 97 N.Y.2d 341, 741 N.Y.S.2d 147, 767 N.E.2d 638 (2001), this Court adopted the rationale of Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 116 S.Ct. 1769, 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996), which held that an investigatory stop is valid, regardless of the officer's motivation, so long as there is an objectively reasonable basis for it (see id. at 812–815, 116 S.Ct. 1769).
In my view, the stop in this case was not objectively reasonable, and was premised on what could only be deemed a “de minimis” violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 375(1)(b)(i). That section provides that “[t]he use or placing of posters or stickers on windshields or rear windows of motor vehicles other than those authorized by the commissioner, is hereby prohibited.” The ***599 concern, of course, as the commissioner notes in the regulations, is that the placement of such items not approved by *458 the commissioner will “interfere with visibility” (15 NYCRR 174.1).
Here, the suppression court concluded that an anonymous tip and the fact that defendant's car was weaving, but within its lane of traffic, were insuffi…

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Jul 12

More importantly, Coffey’s giving voice to a common misconception: young voters haven’t always been left-wing, despite the cultural memory of hippies and antiwar protesters. Most baby boomers weren’t doing that! Only this century have young voters consistently voted to the left of older voters.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Jul 12

Centrist consultant Chris Coffey is quoted giving what the youths might describe as “cope”: young people are always left-wing, it won’t last. This is in some tension with the next thing he says: that 5 years ago the NYC mayoral primary was dominated by moderates. Seems like something’s changed!

“If you go back 100 years‚ you could go back to Vietnam, you could go back to South Africa — the folks who are the most progressive, shake up the establishment, fight back, are the youngest,” said Chris Coffey, a strategist who worked in Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s administration. “That is not a new phenomenon. The question becomes, around the D.S.A., as they get older do they lose interest? Do they move to the center?”

Mr. Coffey noted that as recently as the 2021 mayoral primary, three of the four top finishers were moderates.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Jun 29

The majority addresses this in a footnote, and its answer is basically "you liberals said you wanted the existence of these agencies to be severable from the for-cause removal protections."

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Jun 29

In Watson (left), the conservatives argue that absentee ballots must be received by election day is that that's supposedly always how it was done until recently. In Slaughter (right), they deride this idea that long historical practice might affect the law as "adverse possession."

enacted the final election-day statute. During the World
Wars, for instance, Congress and at least nine States allowed absentee ballots to arrive after election day in certain
situations. See, e.g., 1918 Md. Laws p. 130; 58 Stat. 146
(noting that “any extension of time for the receipt of absentee ballots permitted by State laws shall apply” to federal
“war ballot[s]” in World War II). Yet that practice returned
to the margins within a few decades. By 1977, a report from
the Department of Defense listed only two States as still
allowing ballots to arrive after election day. See Overseas
Absentee Voting: Hearing on S. 703 before the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, 95th Cong., 1st Sess.,
33–34 (1977). These short-lived outlier rules thus shed little light on the original meaning of “election” in the electionday statutes.
Likewise, although post-election-day deadlines have become more widespread in the last five decades,5 these developments postdate the last election-day statute by over 50
years and the first statute by over a century. These late-intime practices therefore count for little when discerning the
timing restrictions that Congress imposed when it enacted
those statutes. See Pung v. Isabella County, 609 U. S. ___,
___ (2026) (slip op., at 6).
In sum, from this Nation’s founding until the last few decades of the 20th century—a period that spans the enactment of all three election-day statutes—having an “election” on a particular day meant completing ballot collection
on that day.

Placing the power to administer laws in officers who enjoy
“freedom from Presidential oversight (and protection),” in
other words, does not deliver us to a promised land of technocratic governance—it often results only in an “increased
subservience to congressional direction.” Fox Television,
556 U. S., at 523 (plurality opinion). Congress may well
have relied on Humphrey’s in taking more power for itself,
but that is hardly one of the “legitimate” reliance interests
that our precedents contemplate. South Dakota v. Wayfair,
Inc., 585 U. S. 162, 186 (2018) (internal quotation marks
omitted); cf. NLRB v. Noel Canning, 573 U. S. 513, 571–572
(2014) (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment). No branch may
rely on adverse possession to claim power that the Constitution vests elsewhere.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Jun 26

My former representative Yvette Clark thought New York City belonged to the (slave-owning) Dutch around the turn of the 20th century

On the Colbert Report, in its “Better Know a District” segment in early September 2012, when Stephen Colbert asked Clarke what she would have changed in 1898, the year Brooklyn merged with New York City, if she could go back in time, Clarke answered the abolition of slavery. Colbert replied, "Slavery...Really? I didn't realize there was slavery in Brooklyn in 1898". (Slavery was abolished in New York State in 1827.) Clarke responded, "I'm pretty sure there was", saying the Dutch owned slaves in New York in 1898. The next day, Clarke was unavailable for comment, and her media representative stated the statements were meant in jest.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Jun 7

If I hadn’t already read in the news that my congressman @repdangoldman.bsky.social was losing badly to @bradlander.bsky.social in his own internal polls, this mailer he just sent out would have made it pretty clear.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Jun 2

Caitlin Halligan, who's at the center of the NY Court of Appeals between its liberal & conservative wings, wrote a concurrence suggesting that the board (or the legislature) update the law so it's no longer saying black is white and up is down. I hope they listen, but I'm not holding my breath.

But since that time, research on adolescent brain development has significantly reshaped how courts, legislatures, and scholars view youth crime. The United States Supreme Court has recognized that “children have a lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility, leading to recklessness, impulsivity, and heedless risk-taking” (Miller v Alabama, 567 US 460, 471 [2012] [internal quotation marks omitted]). “[T]he signature qualities of youth are transient; as individuals mature, the impetuousness and recklessness that may dominate in younger years can subside” (Johnson v Texas, 509 US 350, 368 [1993]). Given these aspects of adolescent development, the

The defendants also cite several articles concluding that “[a]n overwhelming
amount of research indicates . . . that juvenile sex offenders are far less likely to reoffend
than adult sex offenders” (Nikolas Spilson, The Child That No State Wants: Challenging
Juvenile Sex Offender Regulations as a Violation of the Right to Travel, 2023 Mich St L
Rev 271, 271 [2023]; see also Brittney M. Bowater, Adam Walsh Child Protection and
Safety Act of 2006: Is There a Better Way to Tailor the Sentences of Juvenile Offenders?,
57 Cath U L Rev 817, 840 [2008] [“(M)any studies indicate that juvenile sex offenders
have a lower recidivism rate than adult sex offenders”]). Indeed, the United States
Department of Justice has concluded that “recidivism rates for juveniles who commit
sexual offenses are generally lower than those observed for adult sexual offenders” (US
Dept of Just, Sex Offender Management Assessment and Planning Initiative at 262 [2017]).
And several other state high courts have embraced this finding (see In re A.J.M., 847 NW2d
601, 605-06 [Iowa 2014] [“Research has confirmed that juvenile sex offenders generally
are less likely to re-offend than adults, especially when they receive appropriate treatment”
(internal quotation marks omitted)]; State in Interest of C.K., 233 NJ 44, 74, 182 A3d 917,
934 [2018] [“generally, juvenile sex offenders are less likely to reoffend than adult sex offenders”]; In re J.B., 630 Pa at 435, 107 A3d at 17 [“While adult sexual offenders have a high likelihood of reoffense, juvenile sexual offenders exhibit low levels of recidivism”]).

In furtherance of this goal, the key function
of the Guidelines is to yield “an accurate determination of the risk a sex offender poses to
the public” (People v Mingo, 12 NY3d 563, 574 [2009]). Inherent in this accurate
determination is not only what factors make an individual more likely to reoffend, but just
as importantly those factors which make an individual less likely to reoffend. But the
record before us, as well as a review of publicly available information about the Board’s
activities, gives no indication that the Board has revisited how a defendant’s young age at
the time of offense affects their risk of recidivism, despite the insights that have emerged about both adolescent brain development and recidivism among juvenile sex offenders over the last 30 years. In order to fulfill its statutory mandate, the Board may wish to revisit factor 8 in view of the substantial body of scientific literature that did not exist when the scoring for factor 8 was adopted.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Jun 1

Good lord, does everyone and everything have a podcast these days?

Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://help.ft.com/faq/gifting-and-sharing-an-article/what-is-a-gift-article/.
https://www.ft.com/content/28c8ca92-0c98-46c8-8d51-7c90c68821b7?syn-25a6b1a6=1

Rolf Habben Jansen, chief executive of Hapag-Lloyd, told the shipping line’s podcast recently that the one vessel it managed to transit out of the Strait of Hormuz, which has been in effect shut to most shipping traffic since the beginning of March, had to travel much slower because of the drag created by barnacles.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· May 19

Interesting piece! Might want to do a quick copyedit, particularly in these paragraphs.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· May 13

Notably, Giuliani still has enough money to pay a spokesman to go around claiming he has "restrictive airway disease" from being at Ground Zero, without providing any evidence. www.nytimes.com/2026/05/06/n...

But after receiving medical care, Mr. Giuliani was able to breathe on his own, and he has now been moved from the intensive care unit and “and will spend some time recovering before leaving the hospital,” according to a statement that his spokesman, Ted Goodman, released on Wednesday evening. “The power of prayer is working. The mayor feels it. We feel it,” the statement said.

On Monday, Mr. Goodman said Mr. Giuliani had been diagnosed with restrictive airway disease, a condition he said was linked to the former mayor’s proximity to ground zero on the day of that attack and in the days and weeks afterward. The condition can make respiratory illnesses more threatening, Mr. Goodman said.

Restrictive airway disease and restrictive lung disease are broad categories that capture an array of pulmonary ailments, some experts said.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Apr 19

This book, published in 1986, doesn’t spend as much time on the ecological impact of damming and irrigation as a book might today, but it’s still got some stories. Here’s what happened when the VP went to inaugurate a dam on the Columbia in 1967 and the fish ladders weren’t ready yet:

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Apr 9

At first it seemed like Sepúlveda was abusing his power as senate judiciary chair to retaliate against a judge who ruled against him, and that might well be happening. But as the @nysfocus.com article points out, he's also likely attracting clients through his clout & then screwing up their cases.

Sepúlveda’s position as chair of the state Senate’s Judiciary Committee means that he oversees the confirmation process of many of the state’s judges, and evaluates legislation regulating the state’s legal system.

It also likely enhances Sepúlveda’s image to potential clients, one expert noted. “This person is a state senator — that might give you some reassurance that you’ve picked a good lawyer,” said Rebecca Roiphe, a professor at New York Law School. “In this instance, that would be a mistake.”

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Apr 9

Another article just dropped about NY state senator Luis Sepulveda's questionable legal practice, and @nysfocus.com has some pretty damning details. This makes three separate NYC news outlets covering Sepulveda's missteps in two days. nysfocus.com/2026/04/09/s...

When a member of State Senator Luis Sepúlveda’s staff faced eviction in 2023, the staffer had good reason to be hopeful: Sepúlveda, a practicing attorney, agreed to be his lawyer. Sepúlveda, who chairs the Senate’s powerful Judiciary Committee, then failed to show up to court twice, causing his staffer to lose by default and ultimately leave his home with an eviction on his record.

This wasn’t unusual behavior for Sepúlveda, who for years has maintained a private law practice marked by skipped court appearances, faulty paperwork, and missed deadlines, New York Focus has found.

As a lawyer, the mistakes have piled up. In two cases, Sepúlveda blamed mistakes on his staffers, telling judges that he missed a hearing and a filing deadline because his staff put incorrect dates on his calendar. In one of those cases, his client lost after Sepúlveda failed to file a closing argument, despite a judge’s order to do so. In another case, he blamed a courthouse scanner for failing to capture all the pages of a legal filing.

Some of the mistakes show extreme carelessness. In 2024, Sepúlveda secured an agreement allowing his client, a Bronx landlord, to evict a tenant. But when the landlord tried to follow through and obtain an eviction warrant, it turned out that the agreement had never been signed by the tenant, a man named Francis Arias. Instead, it had been signed by a woman, Ana Polanco, who was not named in the proceeding. This meant that the agreement was invalid, and the court refused to issue an eviction warrant. Neither Arias nor Polanco could be reached for comment.

The errors have continued into the present. In a March eviction case where he represented a tenant, Sepúlveda asked the court to dismiss a judgment against his client — but no such judgment existed. He then missed the hearing where this request was considered, leading to an automatic denial. Sepúlveda subsequently missed another court date, causing his client to lose the case by default and face eviction.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Apr 9

Not really one to talk as a fellow city boy, but...are you sure that's how eggs work?

The diner is “farm-to-table,” he said, sourcing most of its products within a 100-mile radius; its eggs are hatched 48 hours before they’re delivered.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Apr 8

IMO, the administration's only chance of winning this hardened-ballroom case, which Trump obviously cares deeply about, is getting the Supreme Court to throw the case out based on standing. This is the National Trust's argument for why it has standing, which should be sufficient under current law.

A. The National Trust Has Standing.
The District Court correctly concluded the Trust has associational standing.
Add.62-67, Add.118-19. Ms. Hoagland—a trustee and longtime member of the
Trust—lives in D.C., regularly visits President’s Park and its environs for
professional and personal reasons, and plans to continue using and enjoying the area,
Add.9-11. She has explained, both from her perspective as a historian and as
someone who cares deeply about the White House, how she will be harmed by
construction of the ballroom. Id. That is precisely the particularized, concrete, and
continuing use of a specific place that establishes aesthetic injury. See Sierra Club
v. FERC, 827 F.3d 59 (D.C. Cir. 2016).
Defendants mischaracterize Ms. Hoagland’s declaration as detailing merely
“incidental viewership” of the White House, and claim she will not be able to see the completed ballroom, Mot.13-14 (citing Environmental Def. Fund v. FERC, 2 F.4th 953, 970 (D.C. Cir. 2021)). The District Court rejected the latter as “pure fiction,” Add.118-19—a finding that Defendants do not even try to show was clearly erroneous—and the former entirely misses the point. The White House is not a
nuisance or “eyesore,” causing cognizable harm only to those who have the misfortune of living near it, as in EDF; rather, it is an attraction, which when damaged harms those like Ms. Hoagland who use and enjoy it, Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 555 U.S. 488, 494 (2009); Add.62-67

Ms. Hoagland’s injury is also “germane” to the Trust’s purposes—an
“undemanding” standard of “mere pertinence” the Trust easily satisfies, Nat’l Lime
Ass’n v. EPA, 233 F.3d 625, 637 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (citations omitted). The Trust was
established by Congress “to facilitate public participation in the preservation of sites,
buildings, and objects of national significance or interest,” 54 U.S.C. §312102(a),
and for decades has done so by maintaining historic properties, suing to protect others, and assisting in administration of federal preservation programs, Add.1-3, see, e.g., 54 U.S.C. §308602(b). Unable to dispute this, Defendants instead dissemble by misrepresenting the legislative history of the NHPA—a statute not invoked in this case precisely because it does not apply to the White House, 54 U.S.C. §307104, see Dkt.33 at 3-4.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Apr 5

When newly elected President Carter tried to cancel a bunch of enormously expensive dam projects—not by impoundment, like Trump has done, but by pressing Congress not to fund them—Congress, entirely controlled by his own party, went into a rage about its “Constitutional prerogative.” Carter lost.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Mar 29

At a moment when Congress seems to be abdicating any remaining influence it has to the President, it’s fascinating to read about an executive-branch agency that’s effectively controlled only by Congress. This is about the Bureau of Reclamation, particularly under commissioner Floyd Dominy (1959-69):

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Feb 16

I think you're missing the word "frequently"

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Feb 9

How is that possible

Robin Kelly's official portrait from 2021, taken from Wikipedia. She does not look like she's in her 60s!

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Dec 16

How can it be legal for the @nytimes.com to mention this without even including a link? www.nytimes.com/2025/12/09/c...

"Beaver wetlands once blanketed North America, helping to shape the hydrology of the continent. But by the late 1800s, the fur trade had nearly wiped out the animals. State reintroduction efforts followed, **including by parachute in Idaho in 1948**. Now biologists estimate that perhaps 15 million beavers live in North America, down from historic numbers of maybe 100 million or more."

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Dec 6

Many red states have passed anti-trans laws in the last couple years, but only North Dakota did it while multitasking to this extent. www.nybooks.com/articles/202...

The language of these policies usually distinguishes men from women by their reproductive capacity, which is assumed to be determined at birth or even at conception. Each statute mandates that its definitions of “sex,” “female,” and “male” be used whenever those words appear in any part of the state code. Some purport to be establishing a “women’s bill of rights,” as the titles of Kansas’s and Oklahoma’s bills suggest; Louisiana’s is titled “The Women’s Safety and Protection Act.” (On the other hand, the name of North Dakota’s bill—into which legislators slipped another term they wanted to define—captures the arbitrariness involved: “The Definition of Female, Male, Sex, and Scrap Metal Dealer.”)

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Nov 17

The modern private prison industry started in Tennessee in the 1980s and spread to the rest of the U.S. & a few other countries. But private prisons themselves weren’t new; this is what they looked like in 18th century England, as described by Australian historian Robert Hughes in “The Fatal Shore.”

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Oct 31

Reading a medieval history (Christendom by Peter Heather), I was struck by this point about how literacy really encompasses two skills, reading and composition, that can be acquired by different people for different purposes. Thinking about this while editing students’ writing…

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Sep 28

The grand public ceremonies for the opening of the Brooklyn Bridge were scheduled for May 24, 1883. Everyone in New York was looking forward to it except the Irish (from The Great Bridge by David McCullough):

Indeed, the only people who seemed displeased with the arrangements being made were some of the more militant Irish, who in mid-April had suddenly realized that the 24th happened also to be Queen Victoria’s birthday and so began angrily protesting the date selected. The Central Labor Union issued a statement calling on “all good men and women in both cities to remember this latest insult of the would-be aristocratic element in our midst.” The Tribune answered that “it would be difficult, perhaps impossible, to fix upon a day that did not commemorate something or other unpleasant for Ireland,” and as the appointed day drew nearer, there was talk of Irish fanatics, “Dynamite Patriots,” attempting to blow up the bridge.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Sep 22

There are some shows I’ll miss, but it feels good to be part of a broader phenomenon that’s ruining some Disney executives’ month.

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Aug 28

I just got solicited for money by Justin Klekota, who’s running for at-large city council in Somerville, MA where I used to live. Apparently he makes a habit of getting into stupid arguments with random people who rely to his fundraising texts!

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Aug 21

The Times appears to be lifting this quote from @thecity.nyc and altering it to make it even more ridiculous. Brill actually said in Chinese culture it’s common to give gifts of money “to others,” not to reporters. www.thecity.nyc/2025/08/20/w...

Brill denied that his client’s payment to THE CITY reporter was nefarious in any way.

“I can see how this looks strange,” Brill said. “But I assure you that Winnie’s intent was purely innocent. In the Chinese culture, money is often given to others in a gesture of friendship and gratitude. Winnie is apologetic and embarrassed by any negative impression or confusion this may have caused.”

Sam Feldman@srfeld· Aug 15

Don't mean to get into a back and forth about the Evanston zoning code but I read this to mean a type 1 restaurant has to have waiter service