U.S. District Judge Laura Taylor Swain appeared to split the baby between competing proposals from a class of current and former detainees and the administration of New York City Mayor Eric Adams, declining to appoint a receiver with "sweeping powers," while also rebuffing the city's preferred remedy of granting the commissioner of the city's Department of Correction expanded authority to implement reforms to Rikers.
Judge Swain's oversight of Rikers stems from a 2015 consent judgment reached in a class action brought by The Legal Aid Society on behalf of current and former Rikers detainees who alleged a brutal culture of excessive force by Rikers correction officers.
The judge's long-anticipated ruling on the question of receivership comes after she twice found the city and the DOC in contempt of court orders in this case. In the latter decision, Judge Swain held in November that the defendants were in contempt with respect to 18 different court-ordered provisions.
Judge Swain's Tuesday order states that the remediation manager will possess "broad powers," akin to those of a receiver, but she repeatedly stressed the collaborative relationship the remediation manager is to have with the DOC.
Notably, unlike some court-appointed receivers, the new court-appointed manager will not have the unfettered power to cancel or execute union contracts, but will be given authority to determine DOC's positions with respect to contract provisions that are relevant to the judge's findings of contempt.
The remediation manager's authority and the scope of their actions are also subject to a yet-to-be-developed action plan — developed by the new manager in consultation with the DOC and a monitor — that will require court approval.
The remediation manager will have the power to investigate and take disciplinary action to violations of the court's orders with respect to the use of force and other DOC policies, and will be authorized to hire, promote and allocate staff resources in a manner to provide "effective coverage in housing areas and so that there are sufficient qualified and experienced individuals to fill supervisory and other uniformed positions."
In a statement, plaintiffs' counsel lauded Judge Swain's decision.
"This decision confirms what we have long argued: transformative change in the City's jails can only occur under the leadership of an independent authority, unbound by the bureaucratic and political forces that have stifled progress for decades," said Mary Lynne Werlwas of The Legal Aid Society and Debra Greenberger of Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP.
The class, joined by the U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of New York, had argued for a receiver with wide latitude to implement reforms on the troubled jail on an island in the East River, including the power to hire and fire any personnel, set new disciplinary systems, make budgetary decisions and potentially change union contracts.
Jay Clayton, the new U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, called Judge Swain's ruling "a welcomed and much needed milestone."
"The Court's order provides the manager with broad authority, requires consultation and cooperation between the manager and the Commissioner of the Department of Correction, and, importantly, requires the development of a benchmarked plan for improvement and returning authority to the City," Clayton said in a statement.
The city — which has long been vehemently opposed to the appointment of a receiver — had argued in favor of adding the role of "compliance director" to the city's current DOC commissioner, Lynelle Maginley-Liddie, for a guaranteed term of five years, who would report both to the court and city officials.
Judge Swain said that under the city's proposal, "transformational change is unlikely."
Even if the mayor cannot remove the commissioner/compliance director or order her to take specific actions on matters under the court's purview, the judge said "there is no doubt that political influence takes many forms," and Maginley-Liddie or a successor would still report to the mayor "in the ordinary course of business."
Judge Swain said the DOC has never lived up to the contempt orders' requirements that the department "thoroughly, timely and objectively investigate use of force incidents," or to take the appropriate disciplinary action with respect to staff misconduct.
Speaking to reporters at a press conference Tuesday, Adams said the problems at Rikers have been years in the making and said progress has been made under his administration. "We have witnessed the turning around of Rikers," including decreases in stabbings, use of force and assaults on staff, he said.
"We already have a special monitor. We have this oversight, that oversight, that oversight. How much oversight are you going to do before you realize that there are some systemic problems that we have turned around?" Adams said. "So if the federal judge made a determination that they want to do something else and they don't like what we're doing? It's a federal judge. We're going to follow the rules."
As for the receivership plan advocated by the plaintiffs and Manhattan federal prosecutors, among others, Judge Swain said it lacks "a quick and efficient remedy;" is vague as to a plan for the city to take back control over its jails when the process is finished; and does not "incentivize collaboration with department leadership."
"Neither [proposal] on its own, presents a remedy that is designed to both adequately ameliorate defendants' contempt of the ... court orders and build momentum toward a sustainable transition of authority back to defendants," Judge Swain said.
The class action is at least six class actions alleging a pattern and practice of excessive force in New York City jails.
The government is represented by Jeffrey Powell of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York and Rachael Doud of the Department of Justice's Civil Division.
The city of New York is represented by Alan Scheiner, Sheryl Neufeld and Mariam Khan of the City of New York Law Department.
The plaintiff class is represented by Kayla Simpson, Mary Werlwas and Katherine Haas of The Legal Aid Society.
The case is Nunez v. the City of New York et al., case number 1:11-cv-05845, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
--Editing by Michael Watanabe.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
