Police are forcing hundreds of New Yorkers out of their homes every year, and sometimes forcing family members to permanently separate, using an obscure legal tool that doesn't require proof of a crime. The Daily News and Pro Publica published an extensive report today outlining how NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton has drastically expanded the use of what's called nuisance abatement—originally meant to help shutter brothels—to throw out people arrested for drug possession and gambling, and people who happen to sleep under the same roof as them.

The investigation outlines the high-pressure tactics Police Department lawyers use to get people to agree to their own or their family members or acquaintances' perpetual ban from an address, including leaving judges out of negotiations, failing to provide translators, and keeping those targeted locked out until they sign over their rights.

Among the key findings:

  • The nuisance abatement law was created in the 1970s as a tool to clamp down on sex-selling around Times Square.
  • The NYPD now files more than 1,000 nuisance abatement cases a year, almost half of them against residences.
  • Sidney Baumgarten, the former mayoral aide who oversaw the creation of the nuisance abatement law, says that its current use is "wrong," "unconstitutional," and "over-reaching."
  • Most residential nuisance abatement cases involve accusations of drug sales, but many name people convicted of possessing only small amounts of drugs, or people for whom drug possession charges were dismissed.
  • Three quarters of these cases begin with a secret lockout order, meaning those named have already lost access to their homes for as many as five days when they have their first day in court. That day in court often consists primarily of a conversation in the hall with an NYPD lawyer.
  • Half of 297 people who gave up leases or were banished from homes were not convicted of a crime. Some agreed to allowing warantless searches forever as a condition of returning home.
  • The NYPD uses nuisance abatement overwhelmingly against people of color. Nine out of 10 addresses singled out in a year and a half study period were in minority neighborhoods. Only five people researchers managed to identify were white.

Some judges are more skeptical about this project than others. One, just-retired Queens judge Orin Kitzes, signed off on 235 of 236 police evictions that crossed his desk. Asked if anyone besides the cops reviewed the cases before Kitzes signed off on them, the judge's clerk, John Sullivan, said, "Not always. If they can work it out amongst themselves, why would the court need to get involved?"

Manhattan judge Michael Stallman is more circumspect, throwing out most cases because cops fail to provide proof of ongoing illegal activity at addresses, despite his requests.

"It’s difficult for me to evaluate a civil case where I don’t even know whether the criminal case is pending," he said.

Police Commissioner Bratton embraced the expanded use of nuisance abatement power, before primarily handled by city lawyers with proof of crimes at businesses, during his first run as top cop. In 1995, he called it "probably the most powerful civil tool available to the police." It is now a cornerstone of his Broken Windows policy, aimed at strictly cracking down on low-level offenses.

Assistant Commissioner Robert Messner, who runs the department's Civil Enforcement Unit and oversees the penal evictions, sees no human cost in the project, saying, "It’s an action about a place. It’s not about people."

Messner was not modest about his ability to have police lawyers crank out abatement cases, saying, "I'm an astronomically good manager. This is an efficient way to address crime and provide police services."

Despite his confidence, the NYPD refused to hand over recent data about the use of the law for the News's story, and only partially fulfilled a resulting public records request.

Read on for such tales as the Nigerian-American mother who faced eviction because of powder she used for religious rituals and was forced to bar her son from her home because of his past non-criminal drug possession charges—stemming from arrests by a dirty detective. Or the cat starved to death and the woman driven back into homelessness because the woman let her drug dealer friend stay with her. Or the recovering crack addict now living in a homeless shelter because he's barred from sleeping at his parents' home.

And bear in mind that this isn't the only way the NYPD uses the lower proof burdens of civil law to exercise massive power over people. The city takes in several million dollars annually through civil forfeiture, which is when the police take your shit and don't give it back, in the overwhelming majority of cases from people never charged with a crime.