The argument that I chose to review is The matter of New York civil liberties vs New York police department Council. The argument occurred on November 14th 2018. Essentially the argument is about how judges in the NYPD are interpreting laws that govern Police Officers. The New York City police department council are in favor of a foil request which essentially means that they’re okay with police information being public records. However they believe in certain circumstances there should be a redaction, meaning that they should be able to hide or move certain confidential parts of these texts. Arguments that the Civil Liberties made were that should they have to go in and decide for every case what is or isn’t acceptable to be released, and that this would be time consuming. Or Atleast that I what I got from the 30 minute long video.

What I found surprising/interesting was that there wasn’t already a law against releasing specific information. As I feel this would protect the victim in for example, sex crimes. I like how the lawyers and judges conducted theirselves, they were very respectful and apologized when they miscommunicated or left out crucial information. I found the judges more persuasive because I get no being able or having the power to wave this notion. However the Lawyers made good points too. I didn’t understand however, a lot of the terminology they used and the laws they referred to as they were only referred to by number. I found this important because it just shows how a lot of Law is about memorization and good memory is important to have in court.