The Legal Aid Society filed this class action lawsuit to challenge the NYPD’s policy of handcuffing every person accused of a crime throughout their arraignment, the first proceeding in a criminal case where a person faces a judge to determine whether they will be released or jailed pending trial. The lawsuit contends that the NYPD’s arraignment handcuffing policy violates the due process clause of the New York Constitution because judges, not the NYPD, must make an individualized determination that handcuffing is necessary before a person can be handcuffed during a criminal proceeding.

In July 2025, the New York Supreme Court denied Legal Aid’s motion for summary judgment and granted the City’s motion to dismiss, denying class certification as moot. The court ruled that Mr. Allen did not have standing and that Mr. Allen did not state a claim because the right to be free of routine and unexplained restraints does not apply at arraignment. We appealed to the Appellate Division, First Department, filing our brief on February 2, 2026 in the Appellate Division, First Department, and oral argument took place June 2, 2026. Amicus curiae briefs in support were filed by LatinoJustice PRLDEF, NYU's Center on Race, Inequality and the Law, and public defense offices across New York City.

On June 25, 2026, the Appellate Division, First Department, reinstated the complaint. In a unanimous decision, the Appellate Division held that Mr. Allen stated a cause of action that the NYPD's routine and unexplained handcuffing policy violates New York's due process clause. The Court also held that Mr. Allen had standing based on the likely future harm of NYPD's near-universal arraignment handcuffing policy, reinstated Mr. Allen's motion for class certification, and affirmed the lower court's exercise of discretion in denying Mr. Allen's motion for summary judgment.