Threat and Humiliation: Racial Profiling, National Security, and Human Rights in the United States

"We were looking for a white van with white people, and we ended up with a blue car with black people."

– Washington DC Police Chief Charles Ramsey
on ending the search for the "Washington Area Snipers."

After six national public hearings and more than a year of research, AIUSA released its report on Racial Profiling in 2004. The report boldly states that when law enforcement uses racial profiling as a proxy for criminal suspicion it undermines national security. Racial profiling is so pervasive that it has impacted nearly 32 million people in the United States – approximately the population of Canada.

Executive Summary

Racial profiling is a serious human rights problem affecting millions of people in the United States in even the most routine aspects of their daily lives. A year-long study conducted by the Domestic Human Rights Program of Amnesty International USA found that the unlawful use of race in police, immigration, and airport security procedures has expanded since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The study further found that state laws provide insufficient and inconsistent protection against profiling. Despite promises by President George W. Bush shortly after his taking office to end racial profiling, the number of American ethnic, racial, and religious groups whose members are at high risk of being subjected to this scourge has increased substantially.

Testimony at racial profiling hearing

Testimony at Amnesty International USA's hearing on racial profiling in Tulsa, Oklahoma

From July 2003 to August 2004, AIUSA's Domestic Human Rights Program studied the current state of racial profiling by law enforcement agencies in the United States. The process began with the consultation of a wide range of community organizations and the organizing of a series of public hearings across the United States throughout the fall of 2003 (San Francisco/Oakland on September 9, Tulsa on September 30, New York City on October 2, Chicago on October 18 and 20, and Dallas on November 15). At the hearings, victims, human rights advocates, experts and law enforcement officials testified about their experiences with racial profiling.

The hearings were followed by an intensive period of research that included analyzing:

State laws concerning racial profiling
The U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of relevant protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution
Pertinent federal policies
International treaties, covenants, and laws
Recent national public opinion polls
Current U.S. census data
And a wide range of literature on the subject.

The major findings of this study may be summarized as follows:

1. A staggering number of people in the United States are subjected to racial profiling:

Approximately thirty-two million Americans, a number equivalent to the population of Canada, report they have already been victims of racial profiling.
Approximately eighty-seven million Americans are at a high risk of being subjected to future racial profiling during their lifetime.
Racial profiling directly affects Native Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, African Americans, Arab Americans, Persian Americans, American Muslims, many immigrants and visitors, and, under certain circumstances, white Americans.
Racial profiling happens to both women and men, affects all age groups, is used against people from all socio-economic backgrounds, and occurs in rural, suburban, and urban areas.
Racial profiling of citizens and visitors of Middle Eastern and South Asian descent, and others who appear to be from these areas or members of the Muslim and Sikh faiths, has substantially increased since September 11, 2001.

2. As the testimony cited in this report shows, racial profiling occurs in almost every context of people's lives:

While driving: A young African-American schoolteacher reports being routinely pulled over in his suburban neighborhood in San Carlos, California, where only five other African-American families live. Native Americans in Oklahoma report being routinely stopped by police because of the tribal tags displayed on their cars. In Texas, a Muslim student of South Asian ancestry is pulled over and asked by police if he is carrying any dead bodies or bombs.

While walking: In Seattle,Washington, a group of Asian-American youths are detained on a street corner by police for 45 minutes on an allegation of jaywalking. While a sergeant ultimately ordered the officer in question to release them, the young people say they saw whites repeatedly crossing the same street in an illegal manner without being stopped.

While traveling through airports: An eight-year-old Muslim boy from Tulsa, Oklahoma was reportedly separated from his family while airport security officials searched him and dismantled his Boy Scout pinewood derby car. He is now routinely stopped and searched at airports.

While shopping: In New York City, an African-American woman shopping for holiday presents was stopped by security at a major department store. She showed the guards her receipts. Nonetheless, she was taken to a holding cell in the building where every other suspect she saw was a person of color. She was subjected to threats and a body search. She was allowed to leave without being charged three hours later, but was not allowed to take her purchases.

While at home: A Latino family in a Chicago suburb was reportedly awoken at 4:50 a.m. on the day after Father's Day by nine building inspectors and police officers who prohibited the family from getting dressed or moving about. The authorities reportedly proceeded to search the entire house to find evidence of overcrowding. Enforcement of the zoning ordinance, which was used to justify the search, was reportedly targeted at the rapidly-growing Latino population.

While traveling to and from places of worship: A Muslim imam from the Dallas area reports being stopped and arrested by police upon leaving a mosque after an outreach event. Officers stopped him, searched his vehicle, arrested him for expired vehicle tags, and confiscated his computer.

3. Despite the prevalence and serious nature of the problem – including the devastating effect that it often has on victims, their families, and their communities – no jurisdiction in the U.S. has addressed the problem in a way that is both effective and comprehensive. While as of the writing of this report 29 states have passed laws concerning racial profiling, state and federal protections against this problem continue to be grossly insufficient:

Forty-six states do not ban racial profiling based on religion or religious appearance.
Thirty-five states do not ban racial profiling of pedestrians (and the majority of the fifteen states that do, use a definition of racial profiling that makes the ban virtually unenforceable in most circumstances).
The scope of Tennessee's current racial profiling law is so limited that it only pertains to the conditions under which fingerprint records are obtained.
In June 2003, the Department of Justice issued its Guidance Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement Agencies forbidding racial profiling by federal law enforcement officials. Yet, the guidance does not cover profiling based on religion, religious appearance, or national origin; does not apply to state or local law enforcement agencies; does not include any enforcement mechanisms; does not specify punishment for violating officers/agencies; and contains a blanket exception for "national security" and "border integrity" cases. The Guidance is an advisory, and hence is not legally binding.
On February 27, 2001, President Bush said, "racial profiling is wrong" and promised to "end it in America." Yet, more than six years later he has failed to support any federal legislative effort to eliminate racial profiling in the United States.

AIUSA Board Member and US Marshal Matthew Fogg at the release of Amnesty's report on Racial Profiling states, "Racial profiling is a threat to our national security, to the effectiveness and fairness of our criminal justice system, and it is an affront to the dignity of all Americans"

4. When law enforcement officials focus on what people look like, what religion they follow, or what they wear, it puts us all at risk. Several incidents in history illustrate this risk:

In 1901, President McKinley's assassin, a white man born in Michigan, was able to conceal the murder weapon in a bandage wrapped around his arm, pass through security, and go undetected until he shot the president because secret service agents had decided to focus their attention on a "dark complexioned man with a moustache."
In 1995, after bombing the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City, Timothy McVeigh, a white male assailant later convicted of delivering the bomb alone, was able to flee while officers operated on the initial theory that ‘Arab terrorists' had committed the attacks.
In 2002, two African-American male snipers were able to evade police and continue terrorizing residents of the nation's capital and nearby areas. Police, relying on racially-based profiles of serial killers, were searching for antisocial white males.