![handle is hein.crs/govdbce0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
~* or 101 '
Researh Service
Racial Profiling: Constitutional and Statutory
Considerations for Congress
July 24, 2020
Protests over the death of George Floyd in police custody have prompted renewed interest in police
reform efforts. One particular area of focus has been the is sue of racial profiling by state and local police
officials, with some c ommentators arguing that police departments may disproportionately target people
of color for traffic stops, questioning, or search procedures without individualized grounds for suspecting
criminal activity. This Sidebar addresses federal law's constraints on racial profiling, describes existing
enforcement actions, and highlights selected proposals for congressional action.
Existing Law
State and local governments have primary responsibility for law enforcement, and Congress, while having
broader authority over federal law enforcement, has relatively limited authority to regulate state and
municipal police departments. That said, the Constitution and federal statutes set some rules for police
actions, including in the area of racial profiling. Most relevant here, the FourthAmendment requires
individual justification for searches and seizures, and the Equal Protection Clause bars most law-
enforcement decisions based on race. In addition, two federal statutes, 34 U S. C. § 12601 and Title VI of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, allow for racial profiling suits against police departments.
Fourth Amendment Constraints on Searches and Seizures
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution protects [t]he right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. It does not specifically
prohibit racial profiling, but courts would not consider stops and searches based solely on a subject's race
to be reasonable seizures because police have identified no individualized reason for suspicion. The
Amendment has been interpreted to permit police to detain a person briefly for investigative purposes if
an officer has a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity may be afoot. Amere hunch or
inarticulable suspicion does not meet this standard. And law enforcement officers must satisfy escalatiig
legal standards of 'reasonableness' for each level of intrusion upon a person stop, search, seizure, and
arrest.
Courts have held that an officer cannot meet the Fourth Amendment standard by relying on a person's
racial appearance, alone, as grounds for reasonable suspicion. By contrast, the officer may use race, for
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
LSB10524
CRS Lega i&sebar
Prepared .or Memn bersand
Co rn rrmi tUee-s of 0o n g tess,](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.crs/govdbce0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most