Giuliani: Trump was right about 'stop-and-frisk'
© Greg Nash

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani on Wednesday defended Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpJimmy Carter: 'I hope there's an age limit' on presidency White House fires DHS general counsel: report Trump to cap California trip with visit to the border MORE’s claim during Monday night’s debate that stop-and-frisk was not ruled unconstitutional, calling on moderator Lester Holt to apologize.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Donald Trump was right,” Giuliani wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed. “Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonGOP struggles with retirement wave Overnight Energy: Trump to revoke California's tailpipe waiver | Democrats propose bill to revoke Trump endangered species rollback | Trump officials finalize rule allowing fewer inspectors at pork plants Mark Mellman: The most important moment in history? MORE was wrong. Lester Holt should apologize for interfering and trying so hard to help Mrs. Clinton support her incorrect statement that stop and frisk is unconstitutional.”

During the debate, the Republican nominee advocated for the expansion of the use of stop-and-frisk, which Holt said had been ruled unconstitutional in New York. Trump responded by saying it hadn’t, calling a judge who ruled on it “very against police.”

The practice, in which police stop, question and frisk a person on the grounds of reasonable suspicion that either the person is dangerous or a crime has been committed, was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge, but the question was never settled by a higher court.

In his op-ed, Giuliani defended the tactic, saying it should be credited for the drop in crime in New York City. Acknowledging that stop-and-frisk was ruled unconstitutional in 2013, Giuliani argued that the ruling was only targeting the way it was practiced under the administration of his successor, former Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

“During my administration, the U.S. Justice Department spent two years examining stop and frisk and it filed no case,” Giuliani wrote. 

“After continued use of the practice during the administration of Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner [Ray] Kelly, Judge [Shira] Scheindlin found that the volume of stops and the focus on the African-American community made the practice not unconstitutional in general but unconstitutional as applied. “

“This is the distinction that is so important — yet was misunderstood by Mr. Holt and misrepresented by Mrs. Clinton."