New York Assembly Bill A07156

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/21/25
• Refer: 3/21/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Provides for the indefinite suspension of New York city police officers without pay pending the disposition of charges of incompetence or misconduct resulting in death or serious physical injury as defined in section 10.00 of the penal law.

Summary

A07156 would change the rules governing suspension of New York City police officers who are facing disciplinary charges. Under current law, such officers generally may not be suspended for more than 30 days while charges of incompetency or misconduct are pending. This bill creates an exception for cases in which the charges arise from an incident that caused death or serious physical injury, as defined in the Penal Law. In those cases, the officer could be suspended without pay for an "indefinite period," which the bill defines as 90 days, with a possible 30-day extension if the hearing is still unresolved. The bill also requires those disciplinary hearings to be expedited and directs the hearing officer to set a schedule that ensures the matter is completed within the required timeframe. If the officer is ultimately cleared, the bill requires restoration to the position with full pay for the suspension period, minus any unemployment insurance benefits received. If the officer is found guilty, existing disciplinary penalties under the New York City Administrative Code would still apply.

Impact

The bill amends chapter 753 of the laws of 1990 and section 75 of the Civil Service Law to create a narrower, more severe suspension rule for New York City police officers in serious-injury or death-related misconduct cases. It would affect the employment rights of NYPD officers, the authority of the police commissioner, and the procedures used in civil service disciplinary hearings. The measure applies immediately to pending and future cases and would not alter the general 30-day suspension rule for other types of charges.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be framed as a public-accountability and public-safety response to serious police misconduct cases. The proposal suggests support for faster discipline and stronger interim consequences when allegations involve death or serious physical injury. No committee transcript or vote data is available, so there is no recorded legislative debate or roll-call sentiment to indicate broader support or opposition.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the balance between accountability and due process. Supporters would likely argue that officers accused in cases involving death or serious physical injury should not remain on paid status while proceedings drag on, and that expedited hearings protect the public interest. Opponents may argue that indefinite unpaid suspension before a finding of guilt is punitive, could undermine due process protections, and may be unfair if the officer is later exonerated. The bill also raises practical concerns about whether disciplinary hearings can realistically be completed within the proposed timeframes.