African American and Latina/o Cooperation in Challenging Racial Profiling
By the dawn of the new millennium the formal and informal targeting of African Americans, Latinas/os, and other racial minorities for police stops on account of race, popularly known as racial profiling, had grabbed national attention. The federal government promised to use the weapons at its disposal to end racial profiling in the United States. About the same time, the flaws of race-based enforcement of U.S. immigration laws, which expanded as the government escalated efforts to deport undocumented immigrants in the 1990s, also had gained increasing public awareness.
KeywordsMigration Depression Hunt Tate Nigeria
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Parts of this article are adapted from Kevin R. Johnson, “The Case for African American and Latina/o Cooperation in Challenging Race Profiling in Law Enforcement,” Florida Law Review 55 (2003):341.Google Scholar
- 6.Arguments for ending the practice are elaborated on in detail in Kevin R. Johnson, “The case against race profiling in immigration enforcement,” Washington University Law Quarterly 78 (2001):675.Google Scholar
- 15.See U.S. General Accounting Office, U.S. Customs Service: Better Targeting of Airline Passengers for Personal Searches Could Produce Better Results, report to Senator Richard J. Durbin, March 2000.Google Scholar
- 23.See U.S. Office of the Inspector General, The September 11 Detainees: A Review of the Treatment of Aliens Held on Immigration Charges in Connection with the Investigation of the September 11 Attacks, September 2004;Google Scholar
- see also U.S. Office of the inspector General, Report to Congress on Implementation of Section 1001 of the USA PATRIOT Act, June 2003, which concludes that more than 1,000 claims of civil rights violations had been reported as a result of the implementation of the USA PATRIOT Act.Google Scholar
- 26.Richard Delgado, “Rodrigo’s Fifteenth Chronicle: Racial Mixture, Latino-Critical Scholarship, and the Black-White Binary,” Texas Law Review 75, no. 5 (April 1997):1181–1200.Google Scholar