July 17, 2025 New York, NY - A Manhattan Supreme Court judge has temporarily blocked the NYPD's attempt to terminate 30 recently hired police officers, a move that thrusts the department's opaque hiring practices and internal accountability efforts into the spotlight. The officers, who were notified last week they had 24 hours to resign or face dismissal, had allegedly been improperly hired in 2023 or 2024 despite prior disqualifications based on psychological evaluations or background checks.

The legal victory for the officers, championed by the Police Benevolent Association (PBA), comes as the NYPD points the finger at a single inspector, Terell Anderson, for the alleged errors. However, critics, including PBA attorneys and several NYPD fraternal groups, are crying foul, claiming Anderson is being made a scapegoat in a system long plagued by inconsistencies and alleged bias, particularly against minority candidates.

Judge Questions NYPD's Hasty Actions

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Phaedra Perry-Bond on Tuesday extended a temporary restraining order against the terminations, openly questioning the city's rushed approach. "These are human beings that are affected here," Justice Perry-Bond emphasized, highlighting the human cost of the departmental upheaval.

The NYPD, in court papers, asserted that an Internal Affairs Bureau investigation in April found Anderson, then commanding officer of the Candidate Assessment Division (CAD), "unilaterally" cleared dozens of applicants who were deemed "not psychologically fit and/or because of issues uncovered during their character background investigations." Department attorneys contend that "but for the unauthorized unilateral actions of the then Commanding Officer of CAD, none would have been hired."

The "Rogue Inspector" Narrative Under Fire

Despite the NYPD's focus on Inspector Anderson, who has since been transferred to a housing unit, many familiar with the department's hiring process find the "rogue inspector" narrative hard to swallow.

"In our view this is a classic scapegoat scenario," Matthew Daly, an attorney for the PBA, told the judge. "It’s just not plausible that nobody knew what was going on."

Critics argue that the notion of one individual circumventing the NYPD's strict, paramilitary-style protocols strains credulity. This perspective aligns with broader concerns about the fairness and transparency of the NYPD's hiring system.

Accountability Push or Misguided Purge?

The controversy unfolds as NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch strives to tighten accountability within the department, following a series of high-profile scandals involving top police officials. Tisch has advocated for tougher disciplinary measures and implemented new policies aimed at reining in misconduct.

However, some see the targeting of these hires as misguided, even if it aligns with Tisch's broader housecleaning efforts. Eric Sanders, a civil rights attorney and former NYPD member representing one of the affected officers, squarely attributes their predicament to the NYPD's "haphazard hiring system."

"There are no validated standards, no consistency and no legal framework underpinning their disqualifications," Sanders stated, adding, "You can’t enforce rules you don’t follow, and you can’t scapegoat one individual for exposing dysfunction the executive staff enabled for years."

Allegations of Cultural Bias in NYPD Hiring

Patrick Gordon, president of the NYPD Guardians Association, which represents Black members of the force, reinforced the long-standing argument that the NYPD’s evaluation process is culturally biased against people of color.

NYPD Guardians Association Patrick Gordon Credit: Ben Fractenberg/THE CITY

"This psychological process has been known for cherry-picking," Gordon said at a press conference, suggesting that the current issue arose because "what was cherry picked was not the cherries that the police department wanted this time." Gordon also indicated that Anderson's appointment to the candidates' unit was intended to address some of these bias claims.

The case of Tyler Stradford, a 34-year-old officer facing termination, exemplifies the complexities. Stradford, whose father was a veteran NYPD homicide detective, states in an affidavit that he was initially disqualified in 2016. However, after working for the Brooklyn District Attorney's office and the city's Department of Corrections, he was re-contacted by the NYPD in 2024, given the green light by "the inspector," and graduated from the police academy in January, making 20 arrests since.

Officers' Fate Hangs in the Balance

The PBA argues that the 30 officers should not be penalized for a departmental error, especially after being told they had successfully joined the force. The union insists that, at minimum, the officers should retain the right to appeal the NYPD’s decision with proper notice and procedural protections.

The NYPD and city attorneys counter that the recruits had previous opportunities to challenge their initial disqualifications, with only a handful having appealed and none successfully. The department also submitted summaries of negative psychological or character findings for some of the officers, citing issues such as paying for prostitutes, drug use, and a "lack of insight into her social deficits" for one candidate.

As the legal battle continues, the fate of these 30 officers remains uncertain, highlighting the ongoing tension between departmental accountability, individual livelihood, and long-standing concerns about equity in the NYPD's hiring practices.