Judge Temporarily Blocks Mass Firings as Internal Probe Uncovers Flawed Recruitment Decisions
According to The New York Times, more than 30 New York City police officers and recruits were informed on Thursday that they would be terminated for having been improperly hired despite failing psychological evaluations and concealing disqualifying background information. However, those dismissals were swiftly halted by a judge’s temporary restraining order following a legal challenge from the Police Benevolent Association.
The controversy stems from an internal NYPD investigation into 80 officers whose psychological disqualifications were reportedly overridden by Inspector Terrell Anderson, the former head of the Candidate Assessment Division. Anderson was transferred in May to the Housing Bureau after officials uncovered his role in bypassing mandatory hiring protocols.
In a public statement, the NYPD said that 31 officers had not only failed psychological exams but also misrepresented their criminal histories, drug use, previous employment terminations, and even instances of driving with a suspended license. The department clarified that, under New York State law, individuals who receive final disqualification notices are legally barred from joining the force.
“These individuals should not have been hired,” the department said. “We were legally obligated to inform them that they could no longer remain with the NYPD.”
One of the affected officers had four motor vehicle convictions, including for driving 100 mph in a 50 mph zone and for hitting a pedestrian, according to a law enforcement source cited by The New York Times.
The officers were given 24 hours to resign or face dismissal before the Police Benevolent Association (PBA) intervened. A Manhattan Supreme Court judge issued a temporary restraining order halting the firings until a hearing scheduled for next Tuesday. “These police officers did nothing wrong,” said PBA President Patrick Hendry. “Their hiring was tainted by a flawed process—not by their own actions.”
The scandal centers on Inspector Anderson’s authority to override disqualifications. While some in the department argue that he exceeded his limits, his union, the Captains Endowment Association, defended him, stating that previous administrations permitted such discretion. “He was under immense pressure to fill academy classes and did not admit anyone with diagnosed mental health issues,” said union president Chris Monahan.
Anderson, a 21-year veteran of the department, had also gained a reputation for actively seeking to diversify the police force by recruiting more officers of color.
Critics of the NYPD’s psychological screening process argue that it disproportionately affects candidates of color and those who disclose past therapy or counseling. Patrick Gordon, president of the Guardians Association—a group representing Black officers—called the process “subjective and broken.” He noted that some Black candidates had been labeled as paranoid for expressing concerns about being watched in certain neighborhoods.
Mental health professionals who assist candidates in appealing disqualifications have echoed concerns, saying many rejections stem from arbitrary factors rather than serious psychological issues. “There are countless people who have been wrongfully disqualified,” said Dr. Mark Lerner, a psychologist who reviews appeal cases.
According to New York State guidelines, the commander of the Candidate Assessment Division can ultimately determine a recruit’s eligibility, even after a failed psychological assessment. This provision had allowed Anderson to bypass rejections—until this recent review.
As the department and the courts navigate the fallout, the case is igniting broader debates over recruitment standards, equity in policing, and the accountability of decision-makers within the NYPD.
By Emily Zhang — Senior Cultural Reporter exploring culture, innovation, and community with depth and empathy.
Email: e.zhang@midtowntimes.com
