Police unions in New York City are appealing a recent federal court ruling that declared the NYPD's racist Stop and Frisk policy unconstitutional. The groups are seeking to avoid a system in which a federal monitor would have to oversee the NYPD.

The Stop and Frisk policy illegally targets minorities and recently was slammed with a lawsuit by a blind man named Allen Moye who said he was targeted because of his race.

"It was racial profiling, what they did," Moye said to the New York Daily News at the end of August. "They try to put everybody behind bars to do their work."

Despite the claims of racial profiling, police unions don't seem to care. According to the New York Daily News, The Sergeants Benevolent Association filed a notice to appeal the decision, while other police unions said they will follow suit.

The city, which appealed the decision in an appellate court, argued that "every officer who sees a black or Hispanic suspect acting suspiciously must confront the real possibility of being charged with intentional race discrimination if he takes proactive steps to detect or deter crime."

"The establishment of a federal monitor may directly impact our members' safety, day-to-day responsibilities and collective bargaining and other rights," said Patrick Lynch, head of the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, in a statement.

According to the New York Civil Liberties Union website, 89 percent of those who were stopped and frisked in 2012 were totally innocent. A full 87 percent were black or Latino, while only 10 percent were white.