Demonstrators march in a protest against stop-and-frisk in New York City on June 17, 2012 (Credit: Reuters/Eric Thayer) A legal group that fought the landmark civil-rights case in which the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk policies were found to be racially discriminatory and unconstitutional is once again emphasizing that the program was a failure. In the presidential debate on Monday night, Republican nominee Donald Trump claimed that stop-and-frisk “worked very well.” He insisted it “brought the crime rate way down,” and called for it to be implemented in cities like Chicago. Trump’s assertions fly in the face of facts, however.