Amnesty International USA, a human rights organization, offers information about law enforcement racial profiling in its website at www.amnestyusa.org .  According to Amnesty International USA, racial profiling occurs when race is used by law enforcement or private security officials, to any degree, as a basis for criminal suspicion in non-suspect specific investigations.  In this regard, discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religion, nationality or any other particular identity undermines the basic human rights and freedoms to which every person is entitled.  Amnesty International USA further reports that racial profiling makes us less safe, inhibits law enforcement efforts and undermines national unity, providing for the public important information pertaining to racial profiling.  In addition, Amnesty International USA invites victims to share their stories and thoughts in order to join the organization in speaking out about serious human rights violations like racial profiling.  As stated by the organization, 26 states have no law explicitly prohibiting racial profiling and 46 states do not ban racial profiling beased on religion or religious appearance.  To help raise awareness about racial profiling and learn more about this important issue, one can visit the Amnesty International USA website.

In a March 3, 2010 posting at its “Blog of Rights,” the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced that the Human Rights Fund (HRF) has released a report profiling how groups like the ACLU have used international human rights standards and strategies to improve people’s lives in the United States.  According to the posting, the report discusses how the ACLU Human Rights Program worked with the Border Network for Human Rights (BNHR) to make the U.N. Human Rights Committee aware of the problems of racial profiling and harassment of people who live in the Texas-Mexico border region and the overall militarization of the border.  As stated in the blog, residents of that region were the targets of Operation Linebacker, a federally financed law enforcement program meant to target violent crime and drug trafficking at the border.  The ACLU contends that instead of arresting drug runners, the initiative ended up ethnically profiling brown-skinned people.  As a result of the ACLU and BHNR’s advocacy to the U.N., the ACLU reports that the drumbeat of local coverage put pressure on the mayor and legislators in Austin, the state capital, to rethink support for the policing initiative, which was later de-funded.

More information about the ACLU and this report is available at www.aclu.org .

The March issue of Trial reports that a jury has awarded three men $175,000 in a lawsuit against the City of Portland where the plaintiffs alleged that police officers used excessive force.  See, Trial, 3/10, p. 14.  More specifically, the plaintiffs, each of whom is African American, contended that they were subjected to assault, battery, false arrest and excessive force motivated by racial stereotypes.  In this regard, the lawsuit charged that the plaintiffs were returning to their vehicle after a St. Patrick’s Day celebration when they were stopped by police officers as they got into their car in a parking garage.  One plaintiff, who had his seat belt on, immediately informed the officers that he was carrying a gun but had a concealed weapon permit. 

The police officers then allegedly started yelling at the men and drew their weapons, pointing them at the men’s heads as one officer sliced through the seat belt with a knife and the three men were pulled from the car and handcuffed.  The man with the concealed weapon permit was allegedly punched in the groin.  All three men feared they would be shot at any moment.  While the police officers argued in the case that they were just doing their jobs after receiving reports of a fight, the men were not arrested or given any explanation for why they had been stopped.

The jury award occurred in the case Hammick v. City of Portland, No. 0807-09735 (Or., Multnomah Co.Cir. Sept. 28, 2009).

Whether excessive force, assault, battery and false arrest by police occurs in Beaumont, Conroe, Houston or elsewhere, victims of police misconduct may make written complaints to the responsible law enforcement employer and contact an attorney to determine if a police excessive force lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential excessive force claim.

In a Press Release at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/January/10-crt-032.html , U. S. Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys announced on January 13, 2010 that a former Texas Department of Public Safety trooper was convicted by a federal court jury in Corpus Christi, Texas for violating federal law by willfully stealing money from motorists that he had stopped on the highway while working as a trooper.  According to the DOJ Press Release, the former trooper was prosecuted for stopping motorists who appeared to be of Hispanic descent and stealing their money, usually in amounts of several hundred dollars.  As further stated in the Press Release, civilian complaints triggered an undercover operation by the Texas Department of Public Safety, in conjunction with the Texas Rangers, to investigate the trooper.  In the investigation, an undercover officer posed as a civilian of Hispanic descent with limited English language ability.  He was issued several pre-recorded $100 bills.  Upon being stopped by the trooper, the undercover officer was asked for money in his possession which he then took behind the passenger side door of his patrol vehicle.  After the former trooper returned bills to the officer, the officer realized that some of the money was missing, so Texas Rangers and Department of Public Safety officers confronted the trooper and, upon inspection of the partol vehicle, found two of the pre-recorded $100 bills secreted in the passenger side door pocket next to the area where he had gone to count the money, according to the DOJ.

A DOJ attorney quoted in the Press Release stated that “[t]he defendant abused the power granted to him as a law enforcement officer to prey upon unsuspecting motorists for personal gain.”  The defendant faces a maximum sentence of up to four years in prison, restitution and a $400,000.00 fine.  Sentencing has been set for April 20, 2010.

The Public Record posted an article by William Fisher entitled “Sheriff Arpaio Slapped With Another Civil Rights Lawsuit” at http://pubrecord.org/nation/3835/sheriff-arapaio-slapped-another-civil/ .  In the August 21, 2009 news story, Fisher reports that the American Civil Liberties Union (”ACLU”) and the ACLU of Arizona filed suit against Joe Arpaio, the sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, and several of his deputies for the alleged illegal arrest and detention of a U. S. citizen and a legal resident.  According to the article, Sheriff Arpaio describes himself as “America’s Toughest Sheriff” and is being investigated by the Department of Justice (”DOJ”) for civil rights violations.  As stated in the article, the ACLU lawsuit contends that Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (”MCSO”) deputies racially profiled the father and son as they drove their pickup truck on a busy public road and illegally arrested and detained them, violating the U. S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law and prohibition on unreasonable seizures.  An ACLU attorney is quoted in the article as saying “This country was founded on the freedom of individuals to go about their business without fear of being unlawfully stopped, picked up, or interrogated by the government.”  More specifically, the ACLU contends that the father was driving to work when, without provocation, an MCSO vehicle cut in front of him, forcing him to stop abruptly, and MCSO deputies then ordered the father and son out of their vehicle, frisked them and handcuffed them.  According to Fisher’s article, civil libertarians say the latest lawsuit is emblematic of anti-immigrant sentiment in the U. S. - arguably most intense in states that border Mexico - and of mixed signals coming from the Department of Homeland Security, whose Immigration and Enforcement unit has federal responsibility for enforcing immigration regulations.  In addition, the article states that Arpaio has a long history of conflict with other law enforcement and judicial authorities and this newest lawsuit is adding another lawsuit to thousands already pending against him.  In this regard, Fisher reports that from 2004 through November 2007, Arpaio was the target of 2,150 lawsuits in U. S. District and hundreds more in Maricopa County courts - 50 times as many prison-conditions lawsuits as the New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston jail systems combined.

Officials in the east Texas town of Paris said Thursday they are preparing for an influx of black separatists and white supremacists at a planned protest next week over the death of a black man who was run over by a truck and dragged. The Lamar County Commissioner’s Court has created designated zones for protesters to help police maintain order Tuesday, the day a rally organized by the Nation of Islam and the New Black Panther Party is scheduled outside the county courthouse.

The protest is the third related to the death of 24-year-old Brandon McClelland, whose mangled body was found Sept. 16 on a country road outside Paris, about 90 miles northeast of Dallas. Authorities estimated McClelland’s body had been dragged more than 70 feet beneath a vehicle.

Two white men, Shannon Finley and Charles Crostley, were charged with murdering McClelland by running him down in Finley’s pickup after the three friends made a late-night beer run from their dry town across state lines to Oklahoma. But a special prosecutor dismissed the charges last month, citing a lack of evidence, and the men were released after more than eight months in jail.

The previous protests by the Panthers and the Nation of Islam were mostly peaceful and resulted in no arrests. But authorities said there were hints of white supremacist groups showing up this time.

“We have some very specific intel that there would be some counter-protestors — white supremacists, KKK, skinheads — who wish to attend,” said Bill Harris, the first assistant county and district attorney for Lamar County.

At the November and June protests, there were a handful of white supremacists led by Rock Banks, a self-professed grand titan of the East Texas Ku Klux Klan. Words flew in June when Banks waded into the crowd holding aloft a patch depicting a Nazi-era Iron Cross. The KKK, the Nation of Islam and the New Black Panther Party are considered hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The racial implications of the McClelland case have reminded some of the murder of James Byrd, a black man who was chained by the ankles to a pickup by three white men and dragged to death in 1998 in the east Texas town of Jasper.

Lamar County Judge Chuck Superville said the protest zones are designed to separate members of the Nation of Islam and the Panthers from white supremacists. Law enforcement officials requested the zones as a proactive step to avoid conflict.

Main Street, which runs along the east side of the courthouse, will serve as a dividing line, Superville said. He said he is trying to balance free speech rights with public safety concerns and the desire to keep open the courthouse. “We are going to preserve the peace,” the judge said. “This place is more like Mayberry than Jasper.” Brenda Cherry, a community activist in Paris who leads the Concerned Citizens for Racial Equality group, called the commissioners’ decision “racist and ignorant.”

“They are trying to stifle us and violate our constitutional rights,” she said.

Associated Press

According to a recent Associated Press article appearing in The Houston Sun, Attorney General Eric Holder has called for Congress to act to create new hate crime laws in order to stop what he called “violence masquerading as political activism.”  See, Margasak, Larry and Devlin Barrett (AP), “AG Holder Urges New Hate Crimes Law,” The Houston Sun, Vol.26, No.30, 6/16/09, p. 1.  As stated in the article, the AG’s call for Congress to act came as a civil rights coalition said there has been a surge in white supremacist activity since the election of the first African-American president and the economic downturn.  In making his comments, AG Holder cited separate attacks over a two-week period that killed a young soldier in Little Rock, an abortion provider in Wichita and a guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.  The violence, Holder said, “reminds us of the potential threat posed by violent extremists and the tragedy that ensues when reasoned discourse is replaced by armed confrontation.”  As reported in the article, Holder said that to stop such violence, Congress should pass an updated version of hate crimes legislation in order to more effectively prosecute those who commit violent attacks based on gender, disability or sexual orientation.  The growing number of hate crimes against Latinos also shows the need for tougher laws, Holder reportedly said. 

Whether hate crimes and injuries resulting from hate based violence occur in Beaumont, Dallas, Houston or elsewhere, hate crime victims may contact law enforcement and also an attorney or lawyer to determine if a hate crime or personal injury lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential hate crime claim.

According to WBALTV.com, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals heard arguments recently in a case that could have a profound impact on minority drivers and everyone’s ability to obtain public records.  See, http://www.wbaltv.com/news/19432799/detail.html , “Court Hears Racial Profiling Case,” 5/11/09.  According to the article, the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union claim that Maryland State Police are improperly withholding documents that will reveal whether the agency meaningfully investigated complaints of racial profiling.  As reported in the article, two years ago, both groups requested the files for 100 racial profiling complaints that police had investigated since 2003 and determined were unsubstantiated.  State Police have reportedly argued that the records are confidential personnel records, but a lower court ordered state police to turn over redacted records that do not identify individual troopers, so the state police appealed that decision.  A decision in the appeal case may be months away.

The Defender reported recently that the family of a man shot by police in his driveway on New Year’s Eve filed a federal lawsuit against the Bellaire Police Department, alleging that the City of Bellaire routinely engages in racial profiling, used excessive force during his traffic stop and violated his civil rights.  See, Defender News Service, “Robbie Tolan Sues City of Bellaire,” Defender, Vol. 78, No. 29, May 10 - 16, 2009, p. 1.  According to the news article, Robbie Tolan was shot by Bellaire Police Sgt. Jeff Cotton in the early morning hours of December 31, after officers approached the 23-year-old, who they mistakenly thought was driving a stolen vehicle.  Citing Tolan’s lawsuit, the article states further that Tolan, who is black, was shot once in the chest by Cotton, who is white, from a distance of 15 to 20 feet and that the bullet remains lodged in Tolan’s body, all but ending Tolan’s aspiring baseball career.  In addition, the article notes that Tolan maintains he was shot because he is Black living in a mostly white community.  The lawsuit reportedly dissects the officers’ actions in the shooting and alleges a culture of racism among Bellaire police officers, claiming, in part, that police engage in unconstitutional racial profiling and discrimination as a matter of policy.  Further, the lawsuit contends as well that a number of Bellaire officials should be held responsible for a pattern of using excessive force on minorities, amounting to an alleged “de facto” pattern of racial profiling.  According to the article, Bellaire officials have denied that officers engage in racial profiling and an assistant to Cotton’s attorney said Cotton’s actions were not racially motivated.  However, the article also notes that a grand jury indicted Cotton on a charge of aggravated assault by a public servant last month, but Cotton contends he believed his life was in danger when he fired at Tolan. 

Whether excessive force and racial profiling by law enforcement occurs in Bellaire, Beaumont, Houston or elsewhere, victims of unlawful police action may report mistreatment to the appropriate law enforcement employer and consult an attorney to determine if a civil rights lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential claim.

According to a report released by the Southern Poverty Law Center, low-income Latino immigrants in the South are routinely the targets of wage theft, racial profiling and other abuses driven by an anti-immigrant climate that harms all Latinos regardless of their immigration status.  The Southern Poverty Law Center report is entitled “Under Siege: Life For Low-Income Latinos In The South” and, according to a SPLC Press Release, it documents the experiences of Latino immigrants who face increasing hostility as they fill low-wage jobs in Southern states that had few Latino residents until recent years.  As stated in the Press Release, the report is based on a survey of 500 low-income Latinos - including legal residents, undocumented immigrants and U.S. citizens - at five locations in the South, including Nashville, Charlotte, New Orleans, rural southern Georgia, and several towns and cities in northern Alabama.  According to the Press Release, a number of immigrants in the survey described the South as a war zone, and the report’s author was quoted as saying that workplace abuses and racial profiling are rampant in the South.  Discrimination against Latinos in the region constitutes a civil rights crisis that must be addressed, the SPLC report says, and the report concludes that comprehensive immigration reform is the only realistic, fair and humane solution.  For further information see http://www.splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?aid=375 or contact the Southern Poverty Law Center at 400 Washington Ave., Montgomery, Alabama 36104.

As outlined by the Texas Workforce Commission at http://www.twc.state.tx.us/crd/facts.html , Chapter 21 of the Texas Labor Code and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protect individuals against employment discrimination on the basis of national origin as well as race and color.  According to the Texas Workforce Commission (”TWC”), it is unlawful to discriminate against any employee or applicant because of the individual’s national origin, and no one can be denied equal employment opportunity because of birthplace, ancestry, culture, or linguistic characteristics common to a specific ethnic group.  Further, the TWC reports that equal employment opportunity cannot be denied because of marriage or association with persons of a national origin group; membership or association with specific ethnic promotion groups; attendance or participation in schools, churches, temples, or mosques generally associated with a national origin group; or a surname associated with a national origin group.  Moreover, a rule requiring employees to speak only English at all times on the job may violate Title VII, unless the employer shows it is necessary for conducting business. In addition, the TWC states that the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (”IRCA”) prohibits discrimination based on national origin or citizenship.

Whether Latino discrimination in the workplace occurs in Beaumont, Houston or elsewhere, victims of employment discrimination may contact the TWC and a lawyer to determine if an employment discrimination lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential claim.