During the 2016 Presidential Debate tonight at Hofstra University, Lester Holt challenged Donald Trump over his recent suggestions about bringing back stop-and-frisk as a national policy to reduce crime.
The controversial policy was known for unfairly targeting African and Hispanic Americans with questionable results at best, and it was deemed unconstitutional by a federal judge back in 2013. After Trump invoked it during a segment on racial healing and criminal justice, Holt ended up in a tense exchange with the mogul after reminding him that it was an unconstitutional practice.
Holt: “It was ruled unconstitutional.”
Trump: “You’re wrong.”
Trump accused the judge behind the ruling of being anti-police, but Holt pressed on by also reminding him that many view stop-and-frisk as a form of racial profiling. Trump dismissed that notion, saying that having a greater police presence, along with using stop-and-frisk to confiscate guns, was the best way to reduce violence and hostility between the police and their communities.
Watch above, via CNN.
[Image via screengrab]
Have a tip we should know? email@example.com