| Why You Should Care
Law enforcement officials who engage in racial
profiling essentially treat race as evidence of crime,
targeting certain segments of the population as
potential criminal offenders solely by virtue of their
skin color. Innocent minorities are thus harassed more
than innocent white Americans due to stereotyping, and
wrongdoing by minorities is punished more harshly than
wrongdoing by whites. Not surprisingly, such unfair
treatment of minorities breeds distrust and disrespect
for law enforcement in those communities.
Impact:
"Racial
profiling" refers to law enforcement strategies and
practices that single out African Americans and
Hispanics as objects of suspicion solely on the basis of
the color of their skin or their accent. Under such
practices, minorities are disproportionately targeted as
criminal suspects, skewing at the outset the racial
composition of the population ultimately charged,
convicted and incarcerated. Law enforcement officials
who target minority suspects through racial profiling
are frequently driven by the mistaken beliefs that (1)
minorities commit most crimes and (2) most minorities
commit crimes. However, the facts paint a different
picture.
- A nationwide study by the United States Customs Service
revealed that while over 43 percent of those subjected
to searches as part of the Service's drug interdiction
efforts were black or Hispanic, the "hit rates" (the
rates at which the search revealed contraband) for
those groups per capita were lower than for white
Americans.
- General Accounting Office data shows
that while black female U.S. citizens were nine times
more likely to be subjected to x-ray searches by U.S.
Customs Officials than white female U.S. citizens, the
black women searched were less than half as likely to
be found carrying contraband as white females.
- Monitoring by the Maryland State Police on I-95 from
January 1995 to December 1997 found that 70 percent of
the drivers stopped and searched by the police were
black, while only 17.5 percent of all drivers -- and
speeders -- were black. Even though black motorists
were stopped much more frequently than their white
counterparts, the proportion of stopped vehicles in
which drugs were discovered was the same for white and
black drivers.
- In Volusia County, Florida, nearly 70 percent of
those stopped on a particular interstate highway in
Central Florida in 1992 were black or Hispanic,
although blacks and Hispanics comprised only 5 percent
of all drivers on that highway.
Widespread
racial profiling also occurs in the context of
immigration enforcement.
- A National Council of La Raza study
identified a pattern of selective enforcement of U.S.
immigration laws by INS and local officials, whereby
individuals of identifiably Hispanic origin -
including many who were American citizens, legal
permanent residents, or otherwise lawfully in the
United States - were targeted by the authorities and
subjected to interrogation, detention, or arrest for
suspected immigration violations.
- The Arizona Attorney General's office found that
law enforcement officials engaged in "Operation
Restoration" in Chandler, Arizona (a joint endeavor of
the Chandler Police Department and the U.S. Border
Patrol) "without a doubt . . . stopped, detained, and
interrogated [Chandler residents] . . . purely because
of the color of their skin."
- INS data indicates that nearly three-quarters
(73.5%) of all of those deported by the INS are of
Mexican origin -- even though Mexicans constitute less
than half of all undocumented persons in the United
States. Hispanics constitute approximately 60% of all
undocumented persons, but well over 90% of those
subjected to INS enforcement actions are Hispanic.
The inevitable result of such racial profiling
is that far more minorities than white Americans are
arrested, even though minorities are no more likely than
whites to engage in illegal conduct that leads to
arrest. The subtle biases and stereotypes that cause
police officers to engage in racial profiling are
compounded by racially skewed decisions of prosecutors,
who, in this era of mandatory minimum sentences, play a
larger role than ever in determining whether, and for
how long, a convicted defendant will be in prison.
Background
In
1994, Congress enacted legislation (known as "Section 14141") authorizing the
Department of Justice (DOJ) to conduct investigations of
and bring suit against police departments alleged to be
engaging in a pattern or practice of abusive use of
force or racial discrimination such as racial profiling.
This authority led to the development of consent decrees
with the Los Angeles Police Department, the New Jersey
State Police, the Pittsburgh Police Department, and
other jurisdictions to address racial profiling,
excessive use of force, and other concerns.
Civil rights advocates continued to urge further
reforms to eliminate racial profiling -- such as the
increased use of data collection programs by law
enforcement agencies to assess whether their officers
are engaged in racial profiling, establishing
accreditation for law enforcement, as well as
legislation requiring prosecutors to collect data on
exercises of prosecutorial discretion such as charging
decisions, bail and sentencing recommendations.
Throughout these discussions, civil rights advocates
emphasized that fairness and nondiscrimination are
entirely consistent with a commitment to tough,
effective law enforcement.
In June of 1999 President Clinton issued an Executive
Order calling for the collection of data relating to
race, ethnicity and gender in law enforcement
activities. The President stated, "We must work together
to build the trust of all Americans in law enforcement
...stopping or searching individuals on the basis of
race is not effective law enforcement policy, and is not
consistent with our democratic ideals, especially our
commitment to equal protection under the law for all
persons." | 
.gif){kind=tracking}