Racial Profiling Undermines Public Safety

Racial Profiling Undermines Public Safety

For Immediate Release

Date: Friday, November 4, 2011

Contact: Matthew Morgan – 202-226-5543

Racial Profiling Undermines Public Safety Targeting based on race poor substitute for good police work and Illegal (WASHINGTON) – Today, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security held a hearing on “21stCentury Law Enforcement: How Smart Policing Targets Criminal Behavior.”  The hearing focused on racial profiling and its supposed effectiveness as a legitimate law enforcement tactic.  The subcommittee heard testimony from the following witnesses: ·         Mr. Hilary O. Shelton, Director, NAACP Washington Bureau ·         Ms. Heather Mac Donald, Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research ·         Mr. Edward Conlon, Former NYPD Detective ·         Mr. David A. Harris, Professor of Law, University of Pittsburgh Law ·         Mr. Jiles H. Ship, National President, National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives In response to their testimony at today’s hearing , House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) made the following statement: “Racial profiling is a poor substitute for smart policing,” said Conyers.  “The basis of effective policing is the promotion of  a positive relationship between law enforcement officials and the communities they aim to protect.  But the specter of racial profiling has contaminated the relationship between the police and minority communities to such a degree that more than 25 states have enacted legislation to address the issue of racial profiling.  If law enforcement is to do its job effectively, officers at all levels of government should be trained to focus on suspect behavior, not a person’s race, in order to better catch criminals and protect communities.     “Since I first introduced data collection legislation in 1997, I have been engaged in an effort to get to the bottom of racial profiling issues. In response to these concerns, the Department of Justice under the past two presidents and members of Congress have introduced a variety of measures designed to sanction the practice.  Last session, I introduced the End Racial Profiling Act and plan to reintroduce that legislation later this month.  We must put in place a data collection requirement for police stops nationwide.    “Congress must reaffirm the concept that when law-abiding citizens are treated differently by those who enforce the law simply because of their race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin, they are denied the basic respect and equal treatment that is the right of every American.”        ###

Conyers Initiates Investigation of Religious Profiling by U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency in Michigan

Contact: Nicole Triplett, 202-226-5543

Friday, March 25, 2011

Conyers Initiates Investigation of Religious Profiling by U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency in Michigan
(Detroit)—Today, Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) issued the following statement regarding allegations charging the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP) with improper and inappropriate interrogations singling out American-Islamic citizens.

“The allegations of religious profiling raised by Michigan’s Council on American-Islamic Relations in Detroit yesterday should be of concern to all Americans,” said Conyers. “CAIR has alleged that U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents have engaged in a pattern of invasive body searches and interrogations concerning the religious beliefs of American-Islamic citizens while returning home from Canada.”

In CAIR’s letter to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, CAIR described the interrogations as follows:

The passengers hand their passports to an agent. The passengers are immediately told to turn their vehicles off. Within seconds, their vehicles are surrounded by agents brandishing weapons in their direction, whether or not there are women and children in the car. In some instances, there are snipers. The men are thrown against their vehicles, handcuffed, and taken inside for questioning. An invasive and humiliating body search is performed, which many have described as sexual harassment. Some are left handcuffed for hours on end, in many cases standing upright. Others are left in a cell. At least a dozen Muslim women of Somali origin have also reported being subjected to invasive and humiliating searches at the border that they felt were inappropriate and a form of sexual harassment.

American Muslims crossing the border have reported in alarming numbers that they are being subjected to extensive inappropriate questioning pertaining to religion and religious practices. A number of questions appear to be most common:

1. Do you pray five times a day?

2. Which mosque do you pray at?

3. Do you pray your morning prayer at the mosque?

4. Who is the Imam (religious leader) at your mosque?

5. Who else prays at your mosque?

6. Which Muslim charities have you donated to?

7. Which Muslim countries have you traveled to?

8. During your travels to these countries, have you been approached by anyone suspicious?

9. What do you think of Anwar al-Awlacki?

10. Which Muslim organizations are you affiliated with?

11. Are you affiliated with any terrorist organizations?

12. Do you know any terrorists?

13. Are there terrorists in your mosques?

All in all, the process can take anywhere between two to ten hours. More disconcerting is that these same individuals report being subjected to the same mistreatment and inappropriate questioning each and every time they cross the border.

“With federal hearings on radicalization and intense scrutiny by law enforcement of religious institutions, the American-Islamic community today is living in a climate that has the risk of producing a siege mentality,” said Conyers. “I am therefore contacting the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security to initiate an investigation of these allegations, and I will be consulting Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas).”

“The American-Islamic community should know that the federal government will protect the interests of the community, while maintaining the appropriate focus on national security. These allegations of racial and religious profiling at the border are not new and have been supported by previous studies of the Government Accountability Office. For example, in 2000, the GAO found that the U.S. Customs’ patterns used to select airline passengers for more intrusive searches resulted in women and minorities being selected at rates that were not consistent with the rates of finding contraband.”

###