Social Justice and Equality: Racial Profiling

Galina Shlikht, Nicole Gordon and Becky Overstreet
City University of Seattle

Author’s Note
Galina Shilkht, Student, City University
Nicole Gordon, Student, City University
Becky Overstreet, Student, City University

Social Justice and Equality Team Outline (All)

Conflict and Solutions

1. Faulty communication

Sometimes criticism can be given inappropriately. This can result in hurting the feelings of group members leaving them feeling devalued. When this happens, we as a team believe the first thing that must be done is to be honest and let the group know how you feel. So we must acknowledge the conflict. The next appropriate step would be to discuss the conflict with all of the team members. After this, we should try and understand the situation and reach an agreement. One of the agreements could be that criticism be given appropriately and constructively.

2. Time management
With work, kids, and living in different time zones it can be a challenge to find the time that works best for the three of us to discuss the details, questions, and/or concerns about our essay together. Our solution to this is to set up exact times and day, sort of like an online appointment, for when the three of us can be available via Facebook group message.

3. Personality clashes

We all have our own way of doing things. Our styles of working might be different and sometimes this can cause a conflict with each other because of the incompatibility in our personalities. Our solution to this is to remember that we are adults, we were put together to work on this assignment as a group and our grade depends on it. So let’s accept the fact that everyone has different perspectives and respect each other’s opinions and differences. We can focus on giving positive feedback and criticism and not let our attitude get in the way. We all have a common goal, which is to write an essay and receive an A! List of Subtopics for Racial Equality * Equal pay * Racial profiling * Racial equality in education

Individuals in Charge
Week 2 – Galina Shlikht
Week 4 – Galina Shlikht
Week 6 – Nicole Gordon
Week 8 – Rebecca Overstreet
Week 9 – Rebecca Overstreet

Social Justice and Equality: Racial Profiling

Introduction (All)
When it comes to social justice and equality, many issues can be talked about extensively because the rights and equality of human beings are important. Racial profiling has been a deeply troubling problem in America for many years and is a manifestation of discriminatory conduct by law enforcement and the criminal justice system. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, “Racial profiling refers to the discriminatory practice by law enforcement officials of targeting individuals for suspicion of crime based on the individual's race, ethnicity, religion or national origin” ("Racial Profiling," Para. 1). This definition is inferring that because of prejudices about ethnicity, race, religion, or nationality one person might think negatively over another. At its core, racial profiling is a form of discrimination; it is unconstitutional and violates human rights; and is ineffective and counter-productive.
Racial Profiling as a Form of Discrimination (Gordon)
Racial profiling or ethnic profiling is the discrimination of those that are of another race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin with suspicious crimes by the law enforcement that is promised to protect and serve (Racial Profiling, 2015). “Discrimination is the practice of unfairly treating a person or group differently from other people or groups of people” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). Not only is it law enforcement, but also it is security guards, airport security and even airline pilots that are profiling based on race, ethnicity and/or religion. Pilots go so far as to tell the person to exit the plane. It is a problem that has been around for a long time. For a country that has moved on into the “post-racial era” (Racial Profiling, 2015), society seems to still be stuck in a place that is unfair and unjust.
Racial profiling happens every hour of every day, whether it is in the public eye or covered up. It is a completely humiliating and demeaning experience for the person(s) that this happens to. This is fueled by a person’s prejudices and stereotypes of what other characteristics are supposed to be. It is a scary thing to be placed in a situation of being searched or detained for no apparent reason. For example, ABC conducted an experiment, “Driving While Black”, which they aired on television in 1996. The experiment consisted of three African American men riding in a Mercedes through a well-to-do neighborhood in New Jersey. The experiment was to see if the car would be pulled over and what the reason given would be, as the men were driving around. The car was pulled over three times and the men inside were asked to step out, the police asked a lot of questions and their person and car were searched (Kress, 2000). It was supposedly due to a minor traffic violation, but if that was the case, then why all the extra detailed attention? As one can see this was not law enforcement pursuing just any suspect. Considering it was supposed to be a typical traffic stop, the only questions needed to be asked were for the license and registration, what the violation was, and then either a warning or a ticket to be issued.
It’s not just a problem for African Americans. Since the episode with September 11th there has been a surge of scrutiny of other nationalities such as Arabs, Muslims, and South Asians. If they were not connected to the incident then they found other things to charge them with, such as small infractions on immigration. This is based only on race, ethnicity, and religion (Racial Profiling, 2015).
It is unfathomable how these officers have gotten around the stigma of racial profiling; by it not being the sole reason for the people involved being detained. In setting up speed traps, the officers were only pulling over Latinos when there were other people speeding. It was just the authorities’ excuse to pull them over and hound them.
Racial profiling has become dangerous. It has become a matter of life or death. Look at what’s happening in the news. In 1995 a young man was driving his cousins Jaguar in a mostly white neighborhood. After he was pulled over he was killed. The Police said the young man was the problem, but an eyewitness stated that the police officer initiated the fight. The other officers joined in and kicked and clubbed him to death (Racial Profiling, 2015). This kind of discrimination is continually happening every day.
There is research that has been done on the discrimination of others by the police. At the University of California and the University of Chicago they conducted an experiment. They had the officer to go through some training to see if the discriminated against African Americans. In the study it was discovered that the police were more inclined to shoot the African American armed target quicker than the armed white target. They would also shoot an unarmed African American, but not the unarmed white target. An officer that viewed African Americans as being more aggressive were more likely to shoot those targets as well. Due to their bias, shooting the targets became higher (Racial Profiling, 2015). This research shows more proof that racial profiling is discriminatory in this day and age and very widespread.
There are agencies that help and protect those that can’t protect themselves from around the world. One of the agencies is called Human Rights Watch. Those that are profiled and detained are not given the rights they deserve, their rights as human beings, equal treatment and due process. “Investigating, surveillance, or otherwise targeting people solely on the basis of their race, ethnicity, religion or national origin is a clear form of discrimination” (US: End Discriminatory Profiling by Police, 2012). The committee keeps track of records on discrimination incidences to challenge what is right and what is illegal, which has led to a ruling under the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (US: End Discriminatory Profiling by Police, 2012, 4). Another agency is called the Open Society that work towards the betterment of society. They collaborate with law enforcement that would profile. They make it so that the officers’ work towards having a better relationship with the community they are placed in which will help with trust issues and boost officer effectiveness. When people of a certain nationality, ethnic group, religion are treated poorly based on one’s bias then there has to be something done to help the situation. It has a very negative effect on our society. Not only does it make the surrounding community distrust law enforcement, but it also traumatizes those that go through it and has a ripple effect, making those neighborhoods less safe. If society can’t change this and work together, there will be no justice; there will be no peace. It is our Constitutional right as human beings to be safe.
Racial Profiling and the Constitutional and Human Rights (Overstreet)
Racial profiling is a subject with a lot of controversy; it being unconstitutional and a violation of human rights is just one of those controversies. Because of this, there are a couple of Amendments outlined in the Constitution that protect society from racial profiling and its harmful effects, along with actions in process by lawmakers hoping to affect change due to some recent tragedies. Racial profiling is a social justice issue that violates both constitutional and human rights.
The Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the constitution outline the foundation against racial profiling. According to the Fourth Amendment it prohibits a person from being stopped or detained without evidence that he or she was involved in a crime. The troubling part about this, is over time the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation on this has become less protective of individuals’ rights. The Supreme Court also decided that any traffic violation is reason to stop someone, regardless of the initial intentions of the officer. So an officer can find any reason to pull someone over, even if it is because they were profiled, and law enforcement considers it a traffic stop. What’s concerning is because traffic law is somewhat confusing; when an officer stops someone he or she is also subject to a plain-view search on a whim, which allows that officer to search a vehicle just because they saw something as they walked up to the car that might be suspicious (National Motorist Association, 2015, Para 1-2). That is where there is a lot of grey area in the law because it can be considered unconstitutional. Because of this, there have been several cases brought to the Supreme Court, fighting for the Fourth Amendment rights. One example is a recent federal class action case, Floyd, et al. v. City of New York, et al, where the City of New York was challenged on their practices of racial profiling and unconstitutional stop and frisks. The named defendants David Floyd, David Ourlicht, Lalit Clarkson, and Deon Dennis, represented the thousands of New Yorkers who at some point were stopped without any cause while doing their daily routines. CCR, Center for Constitutional Rights, and the plaintiffs stated that the NYPD unlawfully stopped these individuals because they are men of color. This case originated from a previous case, Daniels, et al. v. The City of New York, et al, where the CCR was able to get the NYPDs notorious street crime unit disbanded because of their unconstitutional racial profiling practices as well. This most recent case focuses on the NYPD having a lack of any reasonable suspicion to make stops, which in turn violates our Fourth Amendment rights. There were also obvious racial disparities in who got stopped and searched. What was interesting is 90% of those who were stopped were Black and Latino, even though these two groups only make up 52% of the city’s population. Why was only that portion of the community targeted? This constitutes a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as well (Center for Constitutional Rights, 2013, Para 1,2,8,9,10). This clause prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws (Cornell University Law School, 2015, Para 1). In a historical decision the Supreme Court found the City liable due to a consistent profiling pattern found by the CCR. The Fourteenth Amendment is not set up to “deprive anyone of the equal protection of the laws but precisely to afford everyone the laws’ protection.” (Holloway, 2011, Para 7). Which when it comes to the constitutional and human rights of society, this is supposed to provide equal protection of the law to all citizens. This Amendment was actually ratified in 1868 during the Reconstruction Era; the reason for the ratification was to guarantee black rights after the Civil War. It was one of three Amendments that were ratified, the other two being the Thirteenth Amendment, which abolished slavery, and the Fifteenth, which gave Black men a right to vote (Wormser, 2002, Para 1). This is why even today it is still important to fight for these rights established and ratified years ago.
It is sad to see those who are supposed to uphold the law taking advantage of this flawed system, forcing many to take the law into their own hands. The case of Trayvon Martin is a great example; news reports indicated that George Zimmerman, a 28-year-old, white, local neighborhood watch, and Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-old African American, had gotten into a verbal altercation. Zimmerman felt Martin was a suspicious person in the neighborhood due to his appearance as a young African American male walking the street late at night, with a hood on. This verbal altercation turned into Zimmerman shooting Martin in the chest because “he felt threatened”, even though Martin was unarmed. Zimmerman was later acquitted of the charges, which outraged many people. Now the question remains, would Martin have been treated differently if he were White? The outcry the case has had, due to not only how tragic it was, but also the obvious racial profiling that was involved, has affected change and hope in not just society, but in the legal system as well. Two lawmakers Senator Ben Cardin and Representative John Conyers have announced a companion version of the End Racial Profiling Act of 2013. The legislation plans to help fight against racial profiling in several ways; by including mandatory training for federal law enforcement officials on the issues, submitting data on all routine and spontaneous investigatory activities to the Department of Justice, providing Justice Department grants for the development and implementation of protocols that discourage profiling, and requiring the Attorney General to make periodic reports assessing the nature of any ongoing discriminatory profiling practices (Siddiqul, 2013, Para 2). The hope here is to stop racial profiling from happening. It is overdue for lawmakers to do something about this and is sad that it takes a case like Trayvon Martin’s or Floyd, et al. v. City of New York, et al, in order for actions to be taken. It is obvious that cases continue to slip through the cracks, which in turn creates a human rights issue. Human Rights being the “rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or any other status…”(United Nations Human Rights, 2015, Para 1). Constitutional and human rights are in place for a reason, and that is to make sure each person can live their lives equally and without persecution. In many cases today, society is a place where due to racial profiling one’s human and constitutional rights are being violated; this needs to change. Hopefully what lawmakers have in store is a step in the right direction because not only has constitutional and human rights come into question, but its ineffectiveness is being questioned as well.
Racial Profiling is ineffective and counterproductive (Shlikht)
Various scholars and civil rights groups, among others examining the concept of racial profiling while dealing with crime, attribute the practice to be ineffective, as well as counterproductive. Racial profiling basically relates to a method that relies on the use of race or ethnic characteristics in order to predict whether an individual possesses the likelihood of committing a crime (Farrell et al., 2010). This method receives significant criticism, but has still risen significantly in the recent past especially with the perception of a rise in the terrorism threat. In recent years, racial profiling has become a significant practice in the United States, but many individuals attribute the process as ineffective and counterproductive while dealing with crime.
Racial profiling has achieved wide criticism as a measure of predicting crime with various countries, classifying the method as illegal. The basis behind racial profiling borrows from the assumption that individuals from a certain race or ethnic background possess the capability and likelihood of committing certain crimes. The rise in use of racial profiling was mostly evidenced in the U.S. after the terrorist attacks of 9/11 where investigations by authorities relied on racial profiling of individuals from the Middle East and the Islamic religion (Hudson, 2011). The conclusions remained effective despite unavailability of other factors that warranted conducting investigations among these individuals. The method is legal, and is being used in the U.S. with minority groups being the major victims. For example, African Americans are prone to racial profiling with the authorities attributing them as more prone to crimes and drug trafficking. In a country like the U.K, despite unavailability of official use of racial profiling, statistics still indicate that the method is widely applied. Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 200 allows the police to stop and search people when they perceive the existence of justifiable cause. As a result, Asians are being checked five times more than Whites while Blacks are checked seven times more in comparison to Whites. The issue of racial profiling is therefore not only evidenced in the U.S where it is legal, but also in other nations.
In his presentation of a study that termed racial profiling as counterproductive, Professor David Harris (2012) argues that, “ . . . whenever the law enforcement constructs a profile basing on the wrong type of characteristics like the one that relies on race, religion or ethnicity as opposed to makers of behaviors, it results in spreading the enforcement resources as well as efforts in a more thin manner than it would have occurred on otherwise” (Harris, 2012). The challenge falls to the policy makers for looking at the wrong approach towards fighting the challenge at hand. The statement is an indication that even in situations where the law enforcement officers lack adequate manpower and resources to deal with crimes, the available manpower and inadequate resources at hand are misused through racial profiling. The resources and manpower that otherwise would have enhanced fighting crime effectively is misappropriated while criminals from some races or ethnicities manage to roam freely. Consequently, racial profiling as a means of identifying terrorists serves in delineating societies that would otherwise help in the process of curbing terrorism through community policing programs among others.
Again, the counterproductive aspect of racial profiling is evidenced in the manner of exposing the secret behind police operations that should remain a secret. Law enforcement, through the use of racial profiling; position themselves in weakness in front of criminals. Although the process may prove beneficial for minor crime issues like payment of licenses and plates fees, the process is detrimental while dealing with major issues (Engel et al., 2009). Once the law enforcers rely on a known method of fighting and investigating crimes, they become predictable, allowing criminals to adopt different strategies that are less susceptible and will fail to fall under racial profiling. For example, when Africans Americans are involved in drug trafficking, since they know they run the risk of falling under racial profiling, they may employ Whites to transport the drugs on their behalf. Consequently, terrorists may seek the services of races that do not fall under racial profiling and pay them to facilitate their missions. A good example is, the terrorist attack that occurred in a Tokyo subway over a decade ago. Those carrying out the attack all hailed from Japanese decent. Again, racial profiling encourages police brutality, and as a result, fails to respect the rights of all human beings (Harris. 2010).
Racial profiling is an ineffective and counterproductive method of dealing with crimes. It does not only expose some individuals to unfair treatment from the law enforcers, but also weakens law enforcers, as criminals remain aware of their strategies. This is an obvious issue and society is in a need for a change. Conclusion (All) In conclusion, racial profiling is a hot topic in society because everyone feels strongly about his or her human rights. When people of a certain nationality, ethnic group, or religion are treated poorly based on the biased opinions of others, this is racial profiling; it reinforces the negative stereotypes that are not conducive to equal rights in an increasingly diverse society. What is troubling is that these issues have been around for decades, and law enforcement, nor society seems to be making any leaps or bounds towards correcting what is an obvious problem. Not only is it counterproductive by means of how law enforcement handles it, but it also violates basic constitutional and human rights and is a form of discrimination. There is a need from society to look for other measures to address crimes and ban these methods of racial profiling. As a great writer once said “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not” (Seuss, 2014).

References (All)

Center for Constitutional Rights. (2013, August 12). Floyd, et al. v. City of New York, et al. Retrieved from center for contitutional rights: http://ccrjustice.org/floyd

Cornell University Law School. (2015, January 1). Legal Information Institute. Retrieved from Equal Protection: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/equal_protection

Ethnic Profiling, (2013, July) What it is and why it must end? [Print Photo]. Retrieved from http://opensocietyfoundation.org/explainers/ethnic-profiling-what-it-is-and-why-it-must-end Engel, R. S., Calnon, J. M., & Bernard, T. J. (2009). Theory and racial profiling: Shortcomings and future directions in research. Justice Quarterly. Doi: 10.1080/07418820200095231

Farrell, A., Mcdevitt, J., & Ramirez, D. (2010). A Resource Guide on Racial Profiling Data Collection Systems: Promising Practices and Lessons Learn.

Harris, D. (2012, August 13). Racial Profiling: A Counterproductive Strategy | Privacy SOS. Retrieved from https://privacysos.org/counterproductive_strategy

Harris, D. A. (2011). Profiles in Injustice: Why Racial Profiling Cannot Work. New York: The New Press

Holloway, C. (2011, December 14). Profiling and the Constitution. Retrieved from The Witherspoon Institute : http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2011/12/4405/

Hudson, D. L. (2011). Racial profiling. New York: Chelsea House.

Human Rights Watch. (2012, April 17). Us: End discrimination profiling by police. Retrieved from http://hrw.org/news/2012/04/17

Kress, M. (2000, September 07). Suite against ABC dismissed as a result of 1996 program. East Brunswick Sentinal. Retrieved from http://www.mebs.gmnews

Merriam-Webster. (2015) Definition of discrimination. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster>dictionary>discrimination

National Motorist Association. (2015, January 1). The Supreme Court and Racial Profiling. Retrieved from National Motorist Association: http://www.motorists.org/other/profiling-court

Racial Profiling. (2015) American Civil Liberties Union [Print Photo]. Retrieved from http://aclu.org/issues/racial-and-criminal-justice/racial-profiling Seuss, D. (2014, June 1). 37 Dr Seuss Quotes that Can Change the World. Retrieved from reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/1pjn0d/37_dr_seuss_quotes_that_can_change_the_world_wise/

Siddiqul, S. (2013, July 30). Huff Post Politics. Retrieved from Bill To End Racial Profiling Given New Life By Trayvon Martin Outcry: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/30/racial-profiling-congress_n_3677772.html

United Nations Human Rights. (2015, January 1). Human Rights. Retrieved from United Nations Human Rights: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.aspx

Wormser, R. (2002, January 1). The Fourteenth Amendment Ratified. Retrieved from pbs: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stories_events_14th.html