Policing Race

1
Policing Race Class

• The Kerner Commision Report (1968)
• Findings
• Urban violence reflected the profound frustration
  of inner-city blacks and that racism was deeply
  embedded in American society
• Chronic poverty was a main contributor to unrest
• Systematic police bias and brutality

2
Policing Race Class

• The Kerner Commision Report (1968)
• Sweeping Recommendations
• Education Employment
• Housing
• Public Health
• National income supplementation

3
Policing Race Class

• Racial Profiling
• Black motorists more likely to be asked by
  police if their vehicles can be searched

The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon
probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation,
and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be
seized. -Fourth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution
4
Is there a double-standard (based on longstanding
race and class inequalities in america) in how
the fourth amendment's right to a reasonable
search and seizure is being applied?
Racial Profiling by Ryan Kelly http//www.mnarti
sts.org/
5
Florida v. Bostick The Supreme Court David
Cole in Dialogue
A bus passenger's decision to cooperate with law
en- forcement officers authorizes the police to
conduct a search without first obtaining a
warrant only if the cooperation is voluntary.
"Consent" that is the product of official
intimidation or harassment is not consent at all.
Citizens do not forfeit their constitutional
rights when they are coerced to comply with a
request that they would prefer to refuse. . .
.Bostick chose to permit the search of his
luggage. -Justice Sandra Day OConnor, Florida
v. Bostick
The Fourth Amendment forbids the police from
seizing individuals without some individualized
suspicion that they have committed or are
committing a crime, and the police admitted that
they had none for Bostick. -David Cole, No Equal
Justice, pp.17
6
Florida v. Bostick The Supreme Court David
Cole in Dialogue (Cont.)
If the war (on drugs) is to be fought, those who
fight it must respect the rights of individuals,
whether or not those individuals are suspected of
having committed a crime. By the same token, this
Court is not empowered to forbid law enforcement
practices simply because it considers them dis-
tasteful. The Fourth Amendment proscribes
unreasonable searches and seizures it does not
proscribe voluntary cooperation . . . a court
must consider all the circumstances surrounding
the encounter to determine whether the police
conduct would have communicated to a reasonable
person that the person was not free to decline
the officers' requests or otherwise terminate the
encounter. -Justice Sandra Day OConnor,
Florida v. Bostick
The Courts have never clearly answered a basic
question can the police use an individuals
exercise of her right to say no as a basis for
developing suspicion justifying a nonconsensual
search? . . . Because a consent search requires
no objective individualized suspicion, it is more
likely to be directed at poor young black men
than wealthy white elderly women. . . Those who
are white and wealthy are more likely to know
their rights and to feel secure in asserting
them. -David Cole, No Equal Justice, pp.17
7
Summarizing the Supreme Courts Bostick Decision

• Police may question without informing suspect of
  their right to remain silent
• A person is free to refuse
• Questioning does not equal seizure
• Unless police use coercion
• Individualized evaluation
• All cases must be evaluated on the facts that are
  specific to it.

8
Coles Response

• Police may question without informing suspect of
  their right to remain silent
• a recipe for discrimination
• Questioning does not equal seizure
• Probable cause (objective facts from reliable
  sources) should be the standard used to support
  suspicion
• Individualized evaluation
• Miranda
• F.B.I

9
Discussion Question

• Who do you agree with the Supreme Court
• Or David Cole?