The city of New York has asked a federal judge to toss a putative class action alleging NYPD officials violated the constitutional rights of people on the department's list of purported gang members, saying the lawsuit, brought by three anonymous men, is "highly speculative."

In a motion and memorandum filed Thursday, the city argued the putative class's complaint suffers from numerous defects, requesting that the court dismiss it with prejudice.

"As an initial matter, this claim presupposes that no individuals in the database are in fact members of a 'gang,' 'crew,' or 'criminal group' — which would be an outlandish claim that plaintiffs cannot possibly be making," the city argued. "Thus, while the complaint argues the lack of specificity or consistency in defining these 'criminal groups,' plaintiffs do not, and cannot, allege that gangs do not exist. The NYPD would have cause to include actual gang members in the database."

The city also argued in its filing that the claims mentioned past harms but only speculated about future harms and were also unsuitable for a class action because the allegations would require an individualized fact inquiry for each class member.

Three anonymous plaintiffs, identified as Black men between the ages of 27 and 31, filed the complaint in April, saying they had each been on the list for about a decade despite never having been members of a criminal organization.

One plaintiff was listed as an active gang member despite his employment as an emergency medical technician for the New York Fire Department, according to the lawsuit. Two others alleged that police officers frequently stop them or detain them for hours to question them.

The class action, filed in New York federal court, challenges the nation's largest police department's criminal group database, which the NYPD has maintained is a key tool for investigators. However, 99% of the more than 13,000 people labeled as active gang members on the list are Black or Latino, some as young as 13 years old, the plaintiffs alleged.

The plaintiffs are represented by Ballard Spahr LLP and several nonprofit groups. They alleged that the NYPD's conduct has violated the First, Fourth and 14th Amendments, similar provisions in the state constitution and a New York City prohibition on biased policing. It seeks to block the city from using or updating the list.

On Thursday, the city argued that if the claims are allowed to proceed, the court should not permit the plaintiffs to remain anonymous, saying they have not presented convincing reasons to do so and that it would put the city at a serious disadvantage during discovery.

The plaintiffs are represented by Kevin Jason, Elizabeth Caldwell, Lauren Carbajal, Alexsis Johnson and Catherine Logue of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, Philip Desgranges, Rigodis Appling and Alexandra Ogunsanya of The Legal Aid Society, Andrew Case and Mariana Lopez of LatinoJusticePRLDEF, Anne Venhuizen and Isabel Bolo of The Bronx Defenders, and Samhitha Medatia, Marjorie Peerce, Samuel Erlanger, Marcel Pratt, Katherine Oaks and Christopher Hatfield of Ballard Spahr LLP.

The city and its officials are represented by Kathleen Reilly and Muriel Goode-Trufant of the New York City Law Department.

The case is Plaintiffs 1-3 et al. v. The City of New York et al., case number 1:25-cv-02397, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

--Editing by Covey Son.