Trump’s Stop-and-Frisk Plan Inconsistent With US Constitution - White House

US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump's proposal to use police stop-and-frisk tactics more frequently is not consistent with the supreme law of the United States, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters in a briefing on Tuesday.

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — During a presidential debate on Monday, Trump advocated for the increased use of the stop-and-frisk policy, which he said was very effective in New York City and cut gun-related deaths four times.

"There are a lot of constitutional questions that are raised by [Trump's stop-and-frisk] policy," Earnest stated. "There was a federal judge who weighted in and made it clear that [stop-and-frisk] used in New York was inconsistent with the US constitution."

However, Earnest suggested that since the stop-and-frisk policy "was ended in New York, the city has seen an improvement in crime rates."

Stop-and-frisk, which allows law enforcement officers to search persons on the street, has sparked criticism on civil-rights grounds.

In 2013, a federal judge ruled that the New York Police Department’s aggressive use of the practice violated minorities’ constitutional rights.