Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:21 am
Time: 3:21 am
Results for racial profiling (u.s.)
5 results foundAuthor: Rights Working Group Title: Reclaiming Our Rights: Reflections on Racial Profiling in a Post-9/11 America Summary: In the summer of 2001, racial justice advocates were in the midst of a flurry of exciting developments. After years of work by advocates to fight back against the racially discriminatory impact of the “war on drugs,” the End Racial Profiling Act (ERPA) had been introduced in both houses of Congress. An August hearing in the Senate encouraged hopes for passage within the year. In the private sector, giant corporations Xerox and Microsoft were being sued for racial and gender discrimination, and Coca Cola had just reached, in 2000, a record $192 million settlement in a racial bias case brought by African American employees. The Third World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance was held in early September in Durban, South Africa, to celebrate the end of apartheid and a new global commitment to fighting racial injustice. Then, on September 11th, the tragic attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., changed the nation in a single day. The loss of human life was staggering — there were nearly 3,000 victims killed by the attacks including nationals of more than 70 countries of every race and religion. Not only did all of the passengers on the planes used in the attacks die, but thousands more were killed in the crash sites of the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and the field in Pennsylvania, and hundreds of rescue workers, fire fighters and police officers also gave their lives. Many more residents and rescue workers became ill and some also died in the months and years after the attacks, as debris and dust from the collapsed buildings were proven to be toxic for nearly one year after the attacks. In addition to these terrible losses, another significant loss occurred — the loss of civil liberties and human rights protections for many communities in the U.S. In particular, the problem of racial and religious profiling expanded dramatically under a number of new or revised government policies and programs. The decision in 2001-2002 by the Bush Administration to detain men of Arab, South Asian, or Muslim backgrounds as suspects in the new “war on terrorism” resulted in the arbitrary detention of more than 1,200 individuals. It coincided with a dramatic increase in harassment of and hate crimes against people in those communities. The newly-created Department of Homeland Security (DHS) devoted new and expanded resources toward the detention and deportation of immigrants, increasingly encouraging local police to enforce federal immigration laws and raising concerns about the racial profiling of Latino communities. DHS also joined forces with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other law enforcement agencies to dramatically expand surveillance and information-sharing activities through such initiatives as fusion centers and suspicious activity reporting. These activities have led to allegations of racial profiling of Arab, South Asian, Muslim, and Latino communities by federal agencies. Many state governments joined their federal counterparts in implementing racial profiling as a law enforcement technique. In 2007, the Los Angeles Police Department was forced to cancel a mapping program designed to identify potential extremists in Middle Eastern, Arab, and Muslim communities in Los Angeles after residents protested the plan. In the last two years, a number of states have claimed new authority to enforce federal immigration laws, enacting “papers please” legislation and mandating that local police ask individuals about their immigration or citizenship status. The infamous law enacted in Arizona in 2010—SB 1070—has now been copied and passed in Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina, and Utah, with Pennsylvania holding legislative hearings on similar legislation. Ten years later, the Rights Working Group (RWG) coalition sees the anniversary of these events as a chance to pause and remember — to reflect on our losses since September 11th and to reclaim those rights lost in the aftermath of the attacks. This collection of essays, from public offi cials, policy advocates, grassroots organizers, law enforcement offi cials, and community leaders, shares personal reflections of the struggle to overcome the pervasive human rights problem of racial profiling. Their stories and suggestions are insightful views into the challenges of the work but also the signifi cance of the struggle. Congressman John Conyers, Jr., who first introduced ERPA in 2001, offers an introduction for this collection of essays, noting why the legislation is needed today more than ever. Karen K. Narasaki reminds us that racial profiling is not new, and that we must remember the historical lessons from World War II and the internment of Japanese Americans in order to avoid making the same errors of targeting a particular community out of fear. Laura W. Murphy shares her personal recollections of the encounters her African American family had with law enforcement, and how her experience drove her and others at the ACLU to promote ERPA as an important response to biased policing. Monami Maulik describes her work as a community organizer who was overwhelmed by the racial and religious profiling targeting her community after September 11th and the steps she took to fight back. Shahid Buttar notes that September 11th was used to justify new government powers of surveillance and information-sharing that have resulted in further racial profiling of Muslim, Arab, South Asian, and other immigrant communities. Nadia Tonova and Christian Ramirez discuss the pervasive use of racial profiling on the northern and southern borders of the United States, where border communities increasingly fear contact with both the police and Customs and Border Protection officers. Pramila Jayapal offers insight into the expansion of immigration enforcement programs that have led to racial profiling of Latino and other immigrant communities across the country, impacting community safety and residents’ trust in the police. Former Police Chief Art Venegas highlights the importance of law enforcement officers taking steps to combat racial profiling within their own departments in order to be effective at promoting community safety. In the concluding essay, Senator Benjamin L. Cardin explains his commitment to reintroducing ERPA later this year, noting that racial profiling is not only an ineffective law enforcement technique but also a violation of our constitutional rights. Rights Working Group is grateful to all of them for contributing to this effort. In considering where we go next in the fight against racial profiling, Rights Working Group has provided a list of recommendations at the end of the report, including urging policymakers and community members to join the RWG Racial Profiling: Face the Truth campaign. Dr. Tracie Keesee has graciously contributed recommendations to law enforcement officers working to end racial profiling within their departments. Details: Washington, DC: Rights Working Group, 2011. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 19, 2011 at: http://www.rightsworkinggroup.org/sites/default/files/RWG_911AnnivReport_2011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.rightsworkinggroup.org/sites/default/files/RWG_911AnnivReport_2011.pdf Shelf Number: 123406 Keywords: Bias in Law EnforcementHuman RightsImmigrantsRacial DiscriminationRacial Profiling (U.S.)Racial Profiling in Law EnforcementTerrorism |
Author: Rights Working Group Title: Faces of Racial Profiling: A Report from Communities Across America Summary: The Bill of Rights clearly states that everyone in the United States is entitled to equal treatment and equal protection under the law, that everyone should be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, and should be afforded a presumption of innocence. However, this is not the reality for millions of people in the United States who have been denied these rights — and many others — due to racial profiling. This report seeks to demonstrate the pervasive nature of this nationwide problem, document its impact on individuals, families and communities across the country, and propose recommendations to end this harmful and ineffective practice. Details: Washington, DC: Rights Working Group, 2010. 90p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 22, 2011 at: http://www.rightsworkinggroup.org/sites/default/files/rwg-report-web.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.rightsworkinggroup.org/sites/default/files/rwg-report-web.pdf Shelf Number: 123420 Keywords: Racial Profiling (U.S.)Racial Profiling in Law Enforcement |
Author: The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights Title: Restoring a National Consensus: The Need to End Racial Profiling in America Summary: "Restoring a National Consensus: The Need to End Racial Profiling in America" is an update of our 2003 report, "Wrong Then, Wrong Now: Racial Profiling Before and After September 11, 2001." Sadly, 10 years after 9/11, the problem of racial profiling continues to be a significant national concern that demands priority attention. In releasing this report, our goals are to examine the use of racial profiling in the street-level context in which it originally arose, in the newer context of counterterrorism, and in the most recent context of immigration; and to re-establish a national consensus against racial profiling in all its forms. Details: Washington, D.C.: The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, 2011. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 23, 2012 at http://www.civilrights.org/publications/reports/racial-profiling2011/racial_profiling2011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.civilrights.org/publications/reports/racial-profiling2011/racial_profiling2011.pdf Shelf Number: 124725 Keywords: Police BehaviorPolice Policies and ProceduresRacial Profiling (U.S.) |
Author: National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) Title: Born Suspect: Stop-and-Frisk Abuses & the Continued Fight to End Racial Profiling in America Summary: For more than a century the NAACP has been engaged in the fight for a more fair and effective system of policing in America. Indeed, the first case the Association took on after its inception in 1910 involved defending a sharecropper from an illegal police raid on his farm. And to date, there are more than a dozen national resolutions that emphasize the organization's commitment to advocate for greater law enforcement accountability. Yet, the recent death of young men of color, including Eric Garner in Staten Island, New York and Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri-both unarmed African American men-at the hands of police officers reveals that the battle for justice and accountability continues. In 2012, following the death of teenager Trayvon Martin, and building on the renewed national conversation about racial profiling that ensued as a result of this tragedy, and also on the momentum of decades of advocacy to fight stop-and-frisk abuses in New York City, the NAACP helped leverage a successful collaborative campaign to pass anti-racial profiling and police accountability measures in New York City. In Born Suspect, the New York campaign is used as a framework to open a dialogue on racial profiling across the country. To do this, the NAACP conducted the most up-to-date analysis of state racial profiling laws, analyzing these policies to ascertain whether they include the necessary components to make these policies effective and enforceable. This analysis found that: - 20 state laws do not explicitly prohibit racial profiling - 30 states have some form of racial profiling laws on the books - 17 state laws ban the use of pretextual traffic stops - 17 states criminalize violations of their anti-profiling laws - 3 states allow individuals to seek injunctive relief to stop officers or police departments from racial profiling - 17 states require mandatory data collection for all stops and searches; 15 require analysis and publication of racial profiling data - 17 states require the creation of commissions to review and respond to complaints of racial profiling - No states meet all of the NAACP criteria of an effective racial profiling law Born Suspect also focuses on successful efforts in passing legislation in the New York City Council to determine and recommend effective campaign building tools and strategy components for advocates across the country. These include: - Diverse and Strategic Coalition Building that highlights the need for building a campaign collaboratively with all stakeholders and impacted communities - Grassroots Mobilizing and Advocacy that speaks to the need for activating and empowering community members to serve as change agents - Grasstops Advocacy that ensures strategic participation of high-level, well-recognized community leaders, public figures, and opinion makers - Legislative Advocacy that highlights the need to connect voters to their elected official to advocate for the passage of reform bills - Media & Social Media Strategy that describes the importance of a well-planned and well thought out communications plan that relies on both social and traditional media In addition to providing information on state laws and a roadmap for planning a successful anti-racial profiling campaign, Born Suspect also makes several specific recommendations for advocates, including: - Advocating for Passage of the national End Racial Profiling Act (ERPA), first introduced in both houses of the United States Congress in June of 2001. The bill aims to: o Ban racial profiling at all levels of government o Provide provisions for data collection and monitoring o Include enhanced and funded training on racial profiling o Provide for sanctions and remedies for violations of the law - Calling on the Department of Justice to update the Guidance Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement Agencies, first issued in June of 2003. Though a good first step at the time, the Guidance is long overdue for an update to address its many shortcomings. Specifically, the NAACP calls for an updated Guidance to: o Cover profiling based on national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, and gender identity o Eliminate loopholes allowing profiling to occur under the guise of "national security" and at US borders o Apply to all federal law enforcement activity, including actions by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) o Apply to every state or local agency receiving funds from, or working in cooperation with, federal law enforcement agencies o Explicitly state that the ban on profiling applies to data collection analysis, assessment, and predicated investigations carried out by law enforcement agencies subject to the DOJ Guidance o Include enforcement mechanisms o Advocate for strengthening existing anti-racial profiling policy or introducing new measures at the state and local levels Born Suspect also provides several other resources for advocates including: - A detailed description of various components of an effective anti-profiling law - A model racial profiling bill - An Action Alert on the End Racial Profiling Act - Components of an effective Civilian Police Review Board - A sample Police Misconduct Incident Documentation Form Details: Baltimore, MD: NAACP, 2014. 81p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 15, 2014 at: http://naacp.3cdn.net/443b9cbc69a3ef1aab_ygfm66yd7.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://naacp.3cdn.net/443b9cbc69a3ef1aab_ygfm66yd7.pdf Shelf Number: 133910 Keywords: Police MisconductRacial Profiling (U.S.)Racial Profiling in Law EnforcementStop-and-Frisk |
Author: Starr, Sonja B. Title: Explaining Race Gaps in Policing: Normative and Empirical Challenges Summary: This piece explores the many kinds of quantitative claims that researchers and commentators regularly make about race and policing. Everyone agrees that there are enormous racial gaps in U.S. rates of stops, arrests, searches, and use of force. But there are dramatically conflicting claims as to why. Policing is hard to study, but the problem isn't just the data shortcomings with which the literature has long struggled. It's confusion about what questions we should be asking. Different kinds of numerical comparisons and research designs often imply sharply differing conceptions of what racial equality in policing means. These normative premises often go unstated, such that readers may easily miss these differences. The overarching objective of this Article is to highlight the connection between the normative and the empirical. I identify plausible conceptions of racial equality in policing and assess which empirical methods can best test those conceptions. The Article gives particular attention to how researchers should address two important research questions. The first is whether criminal conduct differences explain policing disparities. Empirical researchers as well as casual commentators typically purport to address this question either by comparing racial groups' shares of police interactions to their shares of crime, or by comparing two groups' ratio of police interactions to their ratio of crimes. Using examples and mathematical proofs, I show that neither of these comparison types answers the key question whether people with like criminal conduct are being treated the same way. These comparisons generally over-correct for racial differences in criminal conduct, misleadingly masking the size (or even reversing the apparent direction) of disparities in policing of people with the same conduct. Second, I examine how researchers should investigate the effects of racial discrimination - a morally important and legally central question, but one that poses serious causal inference challenges. I review several methods in the current literature, which offer useful insights but have substantial limitations, and critique the recently dominant "hit-rate" approach, which relies on faulty normative and empirical premises. Instead, I propose supplementing existing tools with a new approach: the use of "testers." Details: Unpublished Paper, 2015. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 28, 2015 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2550032 Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2550032 Shelf Number: 134483 Keywords: Police Use of ForceRacial DisparitiesRacial Profiling (U.S.)Stop and Search |