Racial Profiling

So doubt there would be much disagreement on this topic outside of the trolls.

Supreme Court rulings for:

Terry v. Ohio (1968)

'The Court held that the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on “unreasonable searches and seizures” is not violated when a police officer has “reasonable suspicion” “in light of his experience” that a crime has been committed. By opening the door to greater law enforcement discretion with respect to whom to stop and search, the Supreme Court in Terry gave its first approval of racial profiling.'

United States v. Brignoni-Ponce (1975)

'The Court acknowledged that, by itself, “apparent Mexican ancestry” does not justify reasonable suspicion that occupants of a vehicle are undocumented drug smugglers, it did rule unanimously that “Mexican appearance” is a “relevant factor.” Ostensibly to help law enforcement justify a stop, Justice Lewis F. Powell offered several reasons sufficient for reasonable suspicion to stop a car near the border with Mexico: “previous experience with alien traffic,” a “heavily loaded” vehicle, a vehicle with “an extraordinary number of passengers,” and finally ‒ the part that justifies racial profiling ‒ “the characteristic appearance of persons who live in Mexico, relying on such factors as the mode of dress and haircut.”'

Whren v. United States (1996)

'By ruling that the Fourth Amendment offered no protection against a racially motivated traffic stop, the Court gave law enforcement officials its approval to racially profile motorists and “closed the courthouse doors to claims of racial bias,” Alexander wrote.'

==========================================

Documents to consider:

4th Amendment

14th Amendment

Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo

==========================================

Conclusion: Words on paper only matter to them when it benefits them.

Up You don't live in the US so you wouldn't comprehend. Those are three Supreme Court cases that have upheld racial profiling. In my state SB1070 (although stripped down) still exists. The point of linking the three cases was to show that the feds have been for racial profiling all along - I think that is well understood when we consider how people of color have historically received an unparallel treatment comparatively to whites (lets not forget the Japanese Americans internment camps and obviously the indigenous).

We are a nation that infringes on the rights of its inhabitants, breaking treaties and documents in the name of greed. Enter any country in that sentence you say? That is an excuse, not a solution.

This is what you think but its not supported factually. I don't think everything revolves around race either but you are mistaken if you are denying it is a component that controls the fabric of this country and society. Getting followed around Rite Aid is not the same as being racially profiled by the police, c'mon duke.