<html>
<body>
<font size=3><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=5><b>
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/south_bay_activists/message/5708;_ylc=X3oDMTJxcDUzbGFmBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzg3NjUzODYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBG1zZ0lkAzU3MDgEc2VjA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTIyNzY5MDc3MA--">
Racial profiling: new commentary <br><br>
</a></b></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#000080">Date:
Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 8:27 AM<br><br>
<br>
When the FBI Sees Danger Race and ethnicity should never be the
driving<br>
force behind investigations.<br><br>
By Bennie G. Thompson<br><br>
Legal Times<br><br>
November 24, 2008<br><br>
<b>Should the FBI be allowed to use race or ethnicity as a factor in
opening an investigation—or what the bureau calls an assessment—of
American citizens?<br>
The attorney general has apparently
said</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#FF0000">
yes.<br><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#000080">Attorney
General Michael Mukasey on Sept. 29 issued new guidelines governing
domestic investigations undertaken by the FBI. <br><br>
</b>The main purpose of these<br>
guidelines, which go into effect on Dec. 1, is to consolidate a range
of<br>
existing guidance for various types of investigations, including
criminal<br>
cases, national security matters, foreign intelligence collection,
civil<br>
disorders, and demonstrations<b>. But they also lower barriers to FBI
agents<br>
building an investigation based, in part, on the race or ethnicity of
the<br>
people being looked at.<br><br>
</b>While the Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that<b> laws using race
as a<br>
predicate are almost always suspect, the attorney general has
seemingly<br>
concluded that this long-established proscription is no longer
applicable.<br><br>
</b>That's just wrong.<br><br>
*JUSTICE VERSUS ITSELF*<br><br>
Ironically, the <b>Justice Department is now of two minds on allowing the
use<br>
of race and ethnicity in launching investigations</b>. While imposing
these new<br>
guidelines, the department has
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#FF0000"><b>not
changed an older policy against racial<br>
and ethnic profiling.<br><br>
</b></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#000080">In 2003,
the Justice Department implemented a<b> race neutrality policy
</b>titled<br>
"<b><i>Guidance Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement
Agencies."<br><br>
</i></b>Pursuant to this policy, the department mandated that all federal
law<br>
enforcement authorities, including those not under the Justice
Department's<br>
direct jurisdiction, absolutely <b>prohibit the use of
<i>"generalized<br>
stereotypes"</i> about race or ethnicity as a factor in their
investigative<br>
procedures.<br><br>
</b>Additionally, if race or ethnicity were to be considered, the 2003
policy<br>
required some sort of<b> trustworthy corroborating evidence linking
individuals of a particular race or ethnicity to<i> "an identified
criminal incident,<br>
scheme, or organization."<br><br>
</i></b>Now, the new guidelines for domestic investigations<b> eliminate
this<br>
requirement for corroborating evidence,</b>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#FF0000"><b>allowing
the FBI to open an<br>
investigation based on nothing more than a general
suspicion</b></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#000080">
. <br><br>
Add the new standard in which<b> race or ethnicity can be a key factor in
starting an investigation</b>, and it grows much too easy to bring the
investigative might of the <b>federal government</b> to bear on the life
of an ordinary American.<br><br>
These lower standards are <b>not necessary to protect our natural
security. <br><br>
</b>The 2003 policy takes into consideration both the<b> intricacies and
urgency of<br>
preventing threats to national security,</b> enforcing laws protecting
the<br>
<b>nation's borders,</b> and shielding the nation from <b>catastrophic
loss of life.<br><br>
</b>The policy states that federal law enforcement officers may not
consider<br>
race or ethnicity<b><i> "except to the extent permitted by the
Constitution and<br>
the laws of the United States."</i></b> <br><br>
Both the policy's explanation and the examples given illustrate the<b>
use of race or ethnicity in circumstances where there is corroborating
evidence</b>, including reliable information or<b> intelligence
</b>sources that indicate that <b>race or ethnicity is a relevant factor
in identifying potentially harmful individuals.<br><br>
</b>But the new guidelines for domestic operations issued by the
attorney<br>
general</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#FF0000"><b>
disregard this careful balancing act between national security and<br>
individual
liberty.</b></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#000080">
They
essentially</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#FF0000"><b>
give the FBI a license to profile<br>
members of certain racial and ethnic groups without cause.<br><br>
</b></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#000080">Mukasey
is sending <b>mixed signals to law enforcement officers</b>. On the
one<br>
hand, the new
guidelines</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#FF0000"><b>
allow racial profiling without any suspicion of<br>
wrongdoing or corroborating
evidence</b></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#000080">.
On the other hand, the old policy<br>
forbids it.<b> What is a responsible FBI agent to do?<br><br>
</b></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=5 color="#000080">* WHICH
POLICY?*<br><br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#000080">The confusion
doesn't end there. <br><br>
<b>Will law enforcement agents from other offices of the Justice
Department and from other agencies that engage in national security
investigations be informed that a FBI investigation in which they might
participate was predicated upon the use of race or ethnicity? <br><br>
</b>Will those other offices or agencies be <b>forced to alter their
policies in order to work with an agency that is often the lead
investigator in critical situations?<br><br>
</b>If other agencies retain their race neutrality policies—and I
certainly hope<br>
that is the case—<b>whose policy will prevail
on</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#FF0000">
joint</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#000080">
investigations</b>? The<br>
FBI's new guidelines could<b> let other agencies continue to formally
recognize that race- or ethnicity-based investigations are misguided
while improperly gathering race- or ethnicity-based information through a
back door.<br><br>
</b>Consider the Department of Homeland Security. In 2004,
then-Secretary <b>Tom<br>
Ridge</b> explicitly <b>adopted the Justice Department's race neutrality
policy for his department.</b> That policy has remained in effect
throughout Secretary<br>
<b>Michael Chertoff's </b>tenure.<br><br>
Of course, the <b>Department of Homeland Security and the FBI often
cooperate with each other in national security matters</b>. How will they
reconcile
their</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#FF0000"><b>
newly conflicting mandates on race and
ethnicity?</b></font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2 color="#000080">
Where one's race neutrality policy conflicts with the other's racial
predicate policy, which will prevail?<br><br>
As chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, I have been
an<br>
ardent supporter of <b>information sharing</b> among law enforcement
agencies and have repeatedly emphasized the importance of agencies coming
together to<b><i> "connect the dots."</i></b> <br><br>
Those<b><i> "dots" </i></b>are supposed to be the national
security and foreign intelligence that different agencies have gathered
reliably and legally. <b>The new FBI guidelines put the intelligence
gleaned by one agency in a whole different light.<br><br>
</b>Since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, citizens of all races
and<br>
ethnicities have worked with and provided information to law enforcement
to<br>
ensure that this country does not suffer another devastating attack.
They<br>
have not differentiated among their fellow Americans based on race
and<br>
ethnicity.<b> They should be able to rest assured that their government
does<br>
not and will not do that either.<br><br>
Any less of a guarantee casts doubt on the ability of the Justice<br>
Department to truly live up to its name. </b>It is my sincere hope
that<br>
Mukasey's actions will not be considered as a model for a
government-wide<br>
shift in policy under this administration<b> or the next.<br><br>
</b>------------------------------<br>
*Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.) is the chairman of the House Committee
on Homeland Security.*<br><br>
<<a href="http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=1&view=page&name=gp&ver=sh3fib53pgpk#11dd599c3aa759e4_toc">
http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=1&view=page&name=gp&ver=sh3fib53pgpk#11dd599c3aa759e4_toc</a>
><br><br>
<br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>