[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 22 (Thursday, February 26, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1688-S1692]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. Corzine, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. 
        Lautenberg, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Kerry, 
        Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Reid, Mr. Dodd, Ms. Cantwell, Ms. Mikulski, and 
        Mr. Edwards):
  S. 2132. A bill to prohibit racial profiling; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, three years ago tomorrow, in his first 
address to a joint session of Congress, President Bush declared that 
racial profiling is wrong and pledged to end it in America. He then 
directed his Attorney General to implement this policy.
  It is now three years later, and the American people are still 
waiting for the President to follow through on his pledge to end racial 
profiling.
  So, today I join with Representative John Conyers, the distinguished 
ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, in re-introducing the 
End Racial Profiling Act. We first introduced this bill in 2001, 
shortly after the President made his pledge and the Attorney General 
asserted that he would work with us on our legislation.
  The End Racial Profiling Act would do exactly what the President 
promised to do: it would ban racial profiling once and for all and 
require Federal, State, and local law enforcement to take steps to end 
and prevent racial profiling.
  I am very pleased that several of my distinguished colleagues have 
joined me on this bill Senators Corzine, Clinton, Lautenberg, Kennedy, 
Schumer, Durbin, Kerry, Boxer, Reid, Dodd, Cantwell, Mikulski, and 
Edwards.
  Racial profiling is the practice by which some law enforcement agents 
routinely stop African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, Arab 
Americans and others simply because of their race, ethnicity, or 
national origin. Reports in States from New Jersey to Florida, and 
Maryland to Texas all show that African Americans, Hispanics, and 
members of other minority groups are being stopped by some police far 
in excess of their share of the population and the rate at which they 
engage in criminal conduct.
  I might add that the urgency for legislation banning racial profiling 
is compounded by concerns post-September 11 that racial profiling--not 
good police work and following up on legitimate leads--is being used 
against Arab and Muslim Americans, or Americans perceived to be Arab or 
Muslim.
  The September 11 attacks were horrific and I share the determination 
of many Americans that finding those responsible and preventing future 
attacks should be this Nation's top priority. This is a challenge that 
our country can and must meet. But we need improved intelligence and 
law enforcement, not racial, ethnic or religious stereotypes, to 
protect our Nation from crime and future terrorist attacks.
  In fact, I believe that the End Racial Profiling Act is a pro-law 
enforcement bill. It will help to restore the trust and confidence of 
the communities our law enforcement have pledged to serve and protect. 
That confidence is crucial to our success in stopping crime, and in 
stopping terrorism. The End Racial Profiling Act is good for law 
enforcement and good for America.
  I'm very pleased that many state and local law enforcement officials 
stand with the sponsors of this bill in condemning racial profiling. 
Many law enforcement officials across the country agree that racial 
profiling is wrong and should not take place in America. In fact, many 
State and local law enforcement officials have begun to take steps to 
address the problem, or even the perception of a problem. For example, 
in my own State of Wisconsin, law enforcement officials have taken 
steps to train police officers, improve academy training, establish 
model policies prohibiting racial profiling, and improve relations with 
our State's diverse communities. I applaud the efforts of Wisconsin law 
enforcement.
  But the Federal Government has a vital role in protecting civil 
rights and acting as a model for State and local law enforcement. Last 
June, the Justice Department issued a policy guidance to Federal law 
enforcement agencies banning racial profiling. But while this guidance 
is a useful first step, it does not achieve the President's stated goal 
of ending racial profiling in America. It does not carry the force of 
law and does not apply to State and local law enforcement. Federal 
legislation is still very much needed.
  Our bill, the End Racial Profiling Act, would ban racial profiling 
and allow the Justice Department or individuals the ability to enforce 
this prohibition by filing a suit for injunctive relief. The bill would 
also require Federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies to 
adopt policies prohibiting racial profiling; to implement effective 
complaint procedures; to implement disciplinary procedures for officers 
who engage in the practice; and to collect data on stops. In addition, 
it requires the Attorney General to report to Congress to allow 
Congress and the American people to monitor whether the steps outlined 
in the bill to prevent and end racial profiling have been effective.
  Like the bill we introduced last Congress, the bill also authorizes 
the Attorney General to provide incentive grants to help law 
enforcement comply with the ban on racial profiling, including funds to 
conduct training of police officers or purchase in-car video cameras.
  Finally, we have revised the bill to conform with the definition of 
racial profiling in the Justice Department's guidance and to reflect 
concerns about racial profiling based on religion in a post-September 
11 America.
  Let me emphasize that local, State, and Federal law enforcement 
agents play a vital role in protecting the public from crime and 
protecting the Nation from terrorism. The vast majority of law 
enforcement agents nationwide discharge their duties professionally and 
without bias and we are all indebted to them for their courage and 
dedication. This bill should not be misinterpreted as a criticism of 
those who put their lives on the line for the rest of us every day. 
Rather, it is a statement that the use of race, ethnicity, religion, or 
national origin in deciding which persons should be subject to traffic 
stops, stops and frisks, questioning, searches, and seizures is wrong 
and ineffective, except where there is specific information linking 
persons of a particular race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin 
to a crime.
  Now, perhaps more than ever before, our Nation cannot afford to waste 
precious law enforcement resources or alienate Americans by tolerating 
discriminatory practices. It is past time for Congress and the 
President to enact comprehensive federal legislation that will end 
racial profiling once and for all.
  I urge the President to make good on his pledge to end racial 
profiling, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the End 
Racial Profiling Act.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2132

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``End Racial 
     Profiling Act of 2004''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings and purposes.

                TITLE I--PROHIBITION OF RACIAL PROFILING

Sec. 101. Prohibition.
Sec. 102. Enforcement.

    TITLE II--PROGRAMS TO ELIMINATE RACIAL PROFILING BY FEDERAL LAW 
                          ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

Sec. 201. Policies to eliminate racial profiling.

[[Page S1689]]

 TITLE III--PROGRAMS TO ELIMINATE RACIAL PROFILING BY STATE AND LOCAL 
                        LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

Sec. 301. Policies required for grants.
Sec. 302. Best practices development grants.

  TITLE IV--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REPORTS ON RACIAL PROFILING IN THE 
                             UNITED STATES

Sec. 401. Attorney General to issue reports on racial profiling in the 
              United States.
Sec. 402. Limitation on use of data.

           TITLE V--DEFINITIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 501. Definitions.
Sec. 502. Severability.
Sec. 503. Savings clause.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) Federal, State, and local law enforcement agents play a 
     vital role in protecting the public from crime and protecting 
     the Nation from terrorism. The vast majority of law 
     enforcement agents nationwide discharge their duties 
     professionally and without bias.
       (2) The use by police officers of race, ethnicity, 
     religion, or national origin in deciding which persons should 
     be subject to traffic stops, stops and frisks, questioning, 
     searches, and seizures is improper.
       (3) In his address to a Joint Session of Congress on 
     February 27, 2001, President George W. Bush declared that 
     ``racial profiling is wrong and we will end it in America.'' 
     He directed the Attorney General to implement this policy.
       (4) In June 2003, the Department of Justice issued a Policy 
     Guidance regarding racial profiling by Federal law 
     enforcement agencies which stated: ``Racial profiling in law 
     enforcement is not merely wrong, but also ineffective. Race-
     based assumptions in law enforcement perpetuate negative 
     racial stereotypes that are harmful to our rich and diverse 
     democracy, and materially impair our efforts to maintain a 
     fair and just society.''
       (5) The Department of Justice Guidance is a useful first 
     step, but does not achieve the President's stated goal of 
     ending racial profiling in America: it does not apply to 
     State and local law enforcement agencies, does not contain a 
     meaningful enforcement mechanism, does not require data 
     collection, and contains an overbroad exception for 
     immigration and national security matters.
       (6) Current efforts by State and local governments to 
     eradicate racial profiling and redress the harms it causes, 
     while also laudable, have been limited in scope and 
     insufficient to address this national problem. Therefore, 
     Federal legislation is needed.
       (7) Statistical evidence from across the country 
     demonstrates that racial profiling is a real and measurable 
     phenomenon.
       (8) As of November 15, 2000, the Department of Justice had 
     14 publicly noticed, ongoing, pattern or practice 
     investigations involving allegations of racial profiling, and 
     had filed 5 pattern and practice lawsuits involving 
     allegations of racial profiling, with 4 of those cases 
     resolved through consent decrees.
       (9) A large majority of individuals subjected to stops and 
     other enforcement activities based on race, ethnicity, 
     religion, or national origin are found to be law abiding and 
     therefore racial profiling is not an effective means to 
     uncover criminal activity.
       (10) A 2001 Department of Justice report on citizen-police 
     contacts in 1999 found that, although African-Americans and 
     Hispanics were more likely to be stopped and searched, they 
     were less likely to be in possession of contraband. On 
     average, searches and seizures of African-American drivers 
     yielded evidence only 8 percent of the time, searches and 
     seizures of Hispanic drivers yielded evidence only 10 percent 
     of the time, and searches and seizures of white drivers 
     yielded evidence 17 percent of the time.
       (11) A 2000 General Accounting Office report on the 
     activities of the United States Customs Service during fiscal 
     year 1998 found that--
       (A) black women who were United States citizens were 9 
     times more likely than white women who were United States 
     citizens to be x-rayed after being frisked or patted down;
       (B) black women who were United States citizens were less 
     than half as likely as white women who were United States 
     citizens to be found carrying contraband; and
       (C) in general, the patterns used to select passengers for 
     more intrusive searches resulted in women and minorities 
     being selected at rates that were not consistent with the 
     rates of finding contraband.
       (12) In some jurisdictions, local law enforcement practices 
     such as ticket and arrest quotas, and similar management 
     practices, may have the unintended effect of encouraging law 
     enforcement agents to engage in racial profiling.
       (13) Racial profiling harms individuals subjected to it 
     because they experience fear, anxiety, humiliation, anger, 
     resentment, and cynicism when they are unjustifiably treated 
     as criminal suspects. By discouraging individuals from 
     traveling freely, racial profiling impairs both interstate 
     and intrastate commerce.
       (14) Racial profiling damages law enforcement and the 
     criminal justice system as a whole by undermining public 
     confidence and trust in the police, the courts, and the 
     criminal law.
       (15) In the wake of the September 11, 2001, terrorist 
     attacks, many Arabs, Muslims, Central and South Asians, and 
     Sikhs, as well as other immigrants and Americans of foreign 
     descent, were treated with generalized suspicion and 
     subjected to searches and seizures based upon religion and 
     national origin, without trustworthy information linking 
     specific individuals to criminal conduct. Such profiling has 
     failed to produce tangible benefits, yet has created a fear 
     and mistrust of law enforcement agencies in these 
     communities.
       (16) Racial profiling violates the equal protection clause 
     of the Constitution. Using race, ethnicity, religion, or 
     national origin as a proxy for criminal suspicion violates 
     the constitutional requirement that police and other 
     government officials accord to all citizens the equal 
     protection of the law. Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan 
     Housing Development Corporation, 429 U.S. 252 (1977).
       (17) Racial profiling is not adequately addressed through 
     suppression motions in criminal cases for two reasons. First, 
     the Supreme Court held, in Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 
     806 (1996), that the racially discriminatory motive of a 
     police officer in making an otherwise valid traffic stop does 
     not warrant the suppression of evidence. Second, since most 
     stops do not result in the discovery of contraband, there is 
     no criminal prosecution and no evidence to suppress.
       (18) A comprehensive national solution is needed to address 
     racial profiling at the Federal, State, and local levels. 
     Federal support is needed to combat racial profiling through 
     specialized training of law enforcement agents, improved 
     management systems, and the acquisition of technology such as 
     in-car video cameras.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to enforce the constitutional right to equal protection 
     of the laws, pursuant to the Fifth Amendment and section 5 of 
     the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States;
       (2) to enforce the constitutional right to protection 
     against unreasonable searches and seizures, pursuant to the 
     Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States;
       (3) to enforce the constitutional right to interstate 
     travel, pursuant to section 2 of article IV of the 
     Constitution of the United States; and
       (4) to regulate interstate commerce, pursuant to clause 3 
     of section 8 of article I of the Constitution of the United 
     States.

                TITLE I--PROHIBITION OF RACIAL PROFILING

     SEC. 101. PROHIBITION.

       No law enforcement agent or law enforcement agency shall 
     engage in racial profiling.

     SEC. 102. ENFORCEMENT.

       (a) Remedy.--The United States, or an individual injured by 
     racial profiling, may enforce this title in a civil action 
     for declaratory or injunctive relief, filed either in a State 
     court of general jurisdiction or in a district court of the 
     United States.
       (b) Parties.--In any action brought pursuant to this title, 
     relief may be obtained against--
       (1) any governmental unit that employed any law enforcement 
     agent who engaged in racial profiling;
       (2) any agent of such unit who engaged in racial profiling; 
     and
       (3) any person with supervisory authority over such agent.
       (c) Nature of Proof.--Proof that the routine or spontaneous 
     investigatory activities of law enforcement agents in a 
     jurisdiction have had a disparate impact on racial, ethnic, 
     or religious minorities shall constitute prima facie evidence 
     of a violation of this title.
       (d) Attorney's Fees.--In any action or proceeding to 
     enforce this title against any governmental unit, the court 
     may allow a prevailing plaintiff, other than the United 
     States, reasonable attorney's fees as part of the costs, and 
     may include expert fees as part of the attorney's fee.

    TITLE II--PROGRAMS TO ELIMINATE RACIAL PROFILING BY FEDERAL LAW 
                          ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

     SEC. 201. POLICIES TO ELIMINATE RACIAL PROFILING.

       (a) In General.--Federal law enforcement agencies shall--
       (1) maintain adequate policies and procedures designed to 
     eliminate racial profiling; and
       (2) cease existing practices that encourage racial 
     profiling.
       (b) Policies.--The policies and procedures described in 
     subsection (a)(1) shall include--
       (1) a prohibition on racial profiling;
       (2) the collection of data on routine investigatory 
     activities sufficient to determine if law enforcement agents 
     are engaged in racial profiling and submission of that data 
     to the Attorney General;
       (3) independent procedures for receiving, investigating, 
     and responding meaningfully to complaints alleging racial 
     profiling by law enforcement agents of the agency;
       (4) procedures to discipline law enforcement agents who 
     engage in racial profiling; and
       (5) such other policies or procedures that the Attorney 
     General deems necessary to eliminate racial profiling.

 TITLE III--PROGRAMS TO ELIMINATE RACIAL PROFILING BY STATE AND LOCAL 
                        LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

     SEC. 301. POLICIES REQUIRED FOR GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--An application by a State or governmental 
     unit for funding under a

[[Page S1690]]

     covered program shall include a certification that such unit 
     and any agency to which it is redistributing program funds--
       (1) maintains adequate policies and procedures designed to 
     eliminate racial profiling; and
       (2) has ceased any existing practices that encourage racial 
     profiling.
       (b) Policies.--The policies and procedures described in 
     subsection (a) shall include--
       (1) a prohibition on racial profiling;
       (2) the collection of data on routine investigatory 
     activities sufficient to determine if law enforcement agents 
     are engaged in racial profiling, and submission of that data 
     to the Attorney General;
       (3) independent procedures for receiving, investigating, 
     and responding meaningfully to complaints alleging racial 
     profiling by law enforcement agents;
       (4) procedures to discipline law enforcement agents who 
     engage in racial profiling; and
       (5) such other policies or procedures that the Attorney 
     General deems necessary to eliminate racial profiling.
       (c) Noncompliance.--If the Attorney General determines that 
     a grantee is not in compliance with conditions established 
     under this title, the Attorney General shall withhold the 
     grant, in whole or in part, until the grantee establishes 
     compliance. The Attorney General shall provide notice 
     regarding State grants and opportunities for private parties 
     to present evidence to the Attorney General that a grantee is 
     not in compliance with conditions established under this 
     title.

     SEC. 302. BEST PRACTICES DEVELOPMENT GRANTS.

       (a) Grant Authorization.--The Attorney General may make 
     grants to States, law enforcement agencies and other 
     governmental units, Indian tribal governments, or other 
     public and private entities, to develop and implement best 
     practice devices and systems to ensure the racially neutral 
     administration of justice.
       (b) Uses.--The funds provided pursuant to subsection (a) 
     may be used to support--
       (1) development and implementation of training to prevent 
     racial profiling and to encourage more respectful interaction 
     with the public;
       (2) acquisition and use of technology to facilitate the 
     collection of data regarding routine investigatory activities 
     in order to determine if law enforcement agents are engaged 
     in racial profiling;
       (3) acquisition and use of technology to verify the 
     accuracy of data collection, including in-car video cameras 
     and portable computer systems;
       (4) development and acquisition of early warning systems 
     and other feedback systems that help identify officers or 
     units of officers engaged in or at risk of racial profiling 
     or other misconduct, including the technology to support such 
     systems;
       (5) establishment or improvement of systems and procedures 
     for receiving, investigating, and responding meaningfully to 
     complaints alleging racial, ethnic, or religious bias by law 
     enforcement agents; and
       (6) establishment or improvement of management systems to 
     ensure that supervisors are held accountable for the conduct 
     of their subordinates.
       (c) Equitable Distribution.--The Attorney General shall 
     ensure that grants under this section are awarded in a manner 
     that reserves an equitable share of funding for small and 
     rural law enforcement agencies.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--The Attorney General 
     shall make available such sums as are necessary to carry out 
     this section from amounts appropriated for programs 
     administered by the Attorney General.

  TITLE IV--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REPORTS ON RACIAL PROFILING IN THE 
                             UNITED STATES

     SEC. 401. ATTORNEY GENERAL TO ISSUE REPORTS ON RACIAL 
                   PROFILING IN THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) Reports.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the enactment 
     of this Act, and each year thereafter, the Attorney General 
     shall submit to Congress a report on racial profiling by 
     Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies in the 
     United States.
       (2) Scope.--The reports issued pursuant to paragraph (1) 
     shall include--
       (A) a summary of data collected pursuant to sections 
     201(b)(2) and 301(b)(2) and any other reliable source of 
     information regarding racial profiling in the United States;
       (B) the status of the adoption and implementation of 
     policies and procedures by Federal law enforcement agencies 
     pursuant to section 201;
       (C) the status of the adoption and implementation of 
     policies and procedures by State and local law enforcement 
     agencies pursuant to sections 301 and 302; and
       (D) a description of any other policies and procedures that 
     the Attorney General believes would facilitate the 
     elimination of racial profiling.
       (b) Data Collection.--Not later than 6 months after the 
     enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall by 
     regulation establish standards for the collection of data 
     under sections 201(b)(2) and 301(b)(2), including standards 
     for setting benchmarks against which collected data shall be 
     measured. Such standards shall result in the collection of 
     data, including data with respect to stops, searches, 
     seizures, and arrests, that is sufficiently detailed to 
     determine whether law enforcement agencies are engaged in 
     racial profiling and to monitor the effectiveness of policies 
     and procedures designed to eliminate racial profiling.
       (c) Public Access.--Data collected under sections 201(b)(2) 
     and 301(b)(2) shall be available to the public.

     SEC. 402. LIMITATION ON USE OF DATA.

       Information released pursuant to section 401 shall not 
     reveal the identity of any individual who is detained or any 
     law enforcement officer involved in a detention.

           TITLE V--DEFINITIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

     SEC. 501. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Covered program.--The term ``covered program'' means 
     any program or activity funded in whole or in part with funds 
     made available under--
       (A) the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law 
     Enforcement Assistance Programs (part E of title I of the 
     Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 
     3750 et seq.));
       (B) the ``Cops on the Beat'' program under part Q of title 
     I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 
     (42 U.S.C. 3796dd et seq.), but not including any program, 
     project, or other activity specified in section 1701(d)(8) of 
     that Act (42 U.S.C. 3796dd(d)(8)); and
       (C) the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant program of the 
     Department of Justice, as described in appropriations Acts.
       (2) Governmental unit.--The term ``governmental unit'' 
     means any department, agency, special purpose district, or 
     other instrumentality of Federal, State, local, or Indian 
     tribal government.
       (3) Law enforcement agency.--The term ``law enforcement 
     agency'' means a Federal, State, local, or Indian tribal 
     public agency engaged in the prevention, detection, or 
     investigation of violations of criminal, immigration, or 
     customs laws.
       (4) Law enforcement agent.--The term ``law enforcement 
     agent'' means any Federal, State, local, or Indian tribal 
     official responsible for enforcing criminal, immigration, or 
     customs laws, including police officers and other agents of 
     Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies.
       (5) Racial profiling.--The term ``racial profiling'' means 
     the practice of a law enforcement agent relying, to any 
     degree, on race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin in 
     selecting which individuals to subject to routine or 
     spontaneous investigatory activities, or in deciding upon the 
     scope and substance of law enforcement activity following the 
     initial investigatory procedure, except when there is 
     trustworthy information, relevant to the locality and 
     timeframe, that links persons of a particular race, 
     ethnicity, religion, or national origin to an identified 
     criminal incident or scheme.
       (6) Routine or spontaneous investigatory activities.--The 
     term ``routine or spontaneous investigatory activities'' 
     means the following activities by law enforcement agents: 
     interviews; traffic stops; pedestrian stops; frisks and other 
     types of body searches; consensual or nonconsensual searches 
     of the persons or possessions (including vehicles) of 
     motorists or pedestrians; inspections and interviews of 
     entrants into the United States that are more extensive than 
     those customarily carried out; immigration related workplace 
     investigations; and such other types of law enforcement 
     encounters compiled by the FBI and the Justice Department's 
     Bureau of Justice Statistics.

     SEC. 502. SEVERABILITY.

       If any provision of this Act or the application of such 
     provision to any person or circumstance is held to be 
     unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act and the 
     application of the provisions of such to any person or 
     circumstance shall not be affected thereby.

     SEC. 503. SAVINGS CLAUSE.

       Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit legal or 
     administrative remedies under section 1979 of the Revised 
     Statutes of the United States (42 U.S.C. 1983), section 
     210401 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act 
     of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14141), the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe 
     Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3701 et seq.), and title VI of 
     the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.).

  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I am very pleased to be joining my 
colleague Senator Russell Feingold and 12 others in reintroducing the 
End Racial Profiling Act.
  I first want to recognize Senator Russ Feingold who has been a 
tremendous leader on this issue--during the last two sessions he held 
the first Senate hearings on racial profiling and he and his staff have 
worked tirelessly to elevate the importance of this issue as a matter 
of civil rights. I also want to commend Representative John Conyers, 
who is introducing companion legislation in the House of 
Representatives today. This is just on example of his indefatigable 
work to address inequities in our society. I also want to thank 
Reverend Reginald Jackson, Executive Director of the New Jersey Black 
Ministers' Council. He and the entire council have worked tirelessly 
for years to address the issue of racial profiling in New Jersey and 
have provided immeasurable assistance in crafting this legislation.

[[Page S1691]]

  The practice of racial profiling is the antithesis of America's 
belief in fairness and equal protection under the law.
  Stopping people on our highways, our streets, and at our borders 
because of the color of their skin tears at the very fabric of American 
society.
  We are a Nation of laws and everyone should receive equal protection 
under the law. Our Constitution tolerates nothing less. We should 
demand nothing less.
  There is no equal protection--there is no equal justice--if law 
enforcement agencies engage in policies and practices that are premised 
on a theory that the way to stop crime is to go after black and brown 
people on the hunch that they are more likely to be criminals.
  Let me add, that not only is racial profiling wrong, it is simply not 
an effective law enforcement tool. There is no evidence that stopping 
people of color adds up to catching bad guys.
  In fact, there is statistical evidence which points out that singling 
out black motorist or Hispanic motorists for stops and searches doesn't 
lead to a higher percentage of arrests. Minority motorists are simply 
no more likely to be breaking the law than white motorists.
  But unfortunately racial profiling persists.
  In 2001, minority motorists accounted for 73 percent of those 
searched on the New Jersey turnpike. But even the State Attorney 
General admitted that State troopers were twice--I repeat twice--as 
likely to find drugs or other illegal items when searching vehicles 
driven by whites.

  Or take the example of the March 2000 Government Accounting Office 
report on the U.S. Customs Service.
  The report found that black, Asian, and Hispanic women were four to 
nine times more likely than white women to be subjected to X rays after 
being frisked or patted down.
  But on the basis of the X ray results, black women were less than 
half as likely as white women to be found carrying contraband.
  This is law enforcement by hunch. No warrants. No probable cause.
  And what is the hunch based on?
  Race--plain and simple.
  No where was this more evident, than in my own home State six years 
ago.
  Four young men on the New Jersey Turnpike in a minivan--on their way 
to North Carolina, hoping to go to school on basketball scholarships.
  Two State troopers pulled them off the road, the frightened driver 
lost control of the van, two dozens shots rang out. Three of the four 
kids were shot.
  I spoke to these kids a while ago. One of the them told me he was 
asleep when the van was pulled over.
  He told me, ``What woke me up was a bullet.''
  Stories like this should wake us all up.
  The practice of racial profiling broadly undermines the confidence of 
the American people in the institutions that we depend on to protect 
and defend us. Different rules for different people do not work.
  Now--We know that many law enforcement agencies, including some from 
my home State, have acknowledged the danger of the practice and have 
taken steps to combat it. Indeed, I am proud to report that New Jersey 
has banned racial profiling. I commend them for their efforts.
  That said, it is clear that this is a national problem that requires 
a national response applicable to all.
  That is why Senator Feingold and I and many others introduced the End 
Racial Profiling Act in 2001 to end this practice. The legislation 
provided a clear, enforceable ban on racial profiling and established a 
``carrot and stick'' approach to encourage law enforcement to take 
steps to end the practice.
  The legislation helped bring much-needed attention to this critical 
issue and was positively received by the civil rights community and 
many in law enforcement. Soon after introduction, Senator Feingold held 
very informative hearings on the bill, at which I testified. We heard 
from several law enforcement leaders, including Oakland Police Chief 
Ronald Davis and Raymond Kelly, former Commissioner of the U.S. Customs 
Service and the New York City Police Department, on the pernicious 
impact of racial profiling on the trust between law enforcement and 
communities that is essential for successful police work. They 
testified that racial profiling is contrary to effective law 
enforcement and indeed takes energy and focus away from finding real 
criminals.
  Then, in June 2003, the U.S. Department of Justice issued guidelines 
to prohibit racial profiling by federal law enforcement agencies, 
following up on President Bush's statement in his February 27, 2001, 
address to a Joint Session of Congress, that racial profiling is 
``wrong and we will end it in America.''
  In this guidance, the Department stated:

       Racial profiling in law enforcement is not merely wrong, 
     but also ineffective. Race-based assumptions in law 
     enforcement perpetuate negative racial stereotypes that are 
     harmful to our rich and diverse democracy, and materially 
     impair our efforts to maintain a fair and just society.

  These guidelines, as well as current efforts by State and local 
governments, to eradicate racial profiling and redress the harms it 
causes, while laudable, have been limited in scope and insufficient to 
address this national problem. Quite simply, federal legislation is 
still very much needed.
  In most respects the legislation we are now introducing today is very 
similar to the bill that we introduced in 2001.
  It clearly defines racial profiling and bans it.
  No routine stops based solely on race, religion, national origin or 
ethnicity. Religion is a new addition to the category of protected 
classes, in acknowledgment of some of the new law enforcement tactics 
developed after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. For example, 
in the wake of the attacks, Arab-American, Muslim-American, South 
Asian-American and Sikh-American communities were made the target of 
generalized suspicion and subjected to searches and seizures based upon 
their religion and national origin, which has created a fear and 
mistrust of law enforcement agencies and failed to produce tangible 
investigative benefit.
  We will also require the collection of statistics to accurately 
measure whether progress is being made. By collecting this data, we 
will get a fair picture of law enforcement at work. And we will provide 
law enforcement with the information they need to detect problems early 
on.
  It is not our intention to micromanage law enforcement. Our bill does 
not tell law enforcement agencies what data should be collected. 
Instead, we direct the Attorney General to develop the standards for 
data collection, and he presumably would work with law enforcement in 
developing those standards. Our legislation also specifically directs 
the Attorney General to also establish standards for setting benchmarks 
against which the collected data should be measured--so that no data is 
taken out of context, as some in law enforcement rightly fear.
  If the numbers reveal a portrait of continued racial profiling, then 
the Justice Department or independent third parties can seek relief in 
Federal court ordering that remedies be put into effect to end racial 
profiling.
  Our bill would also put in place procedures to receive and 
investigate complaints alleging racial profiling.
  It will require procedures to discipline law enforcement officers 
engaging in racial profiling.
  Finally, we will encourage a climate of cultural change in law 
enforcement with a carrot and a stick.
  First, the carrot: We recognize that law enforcement shouldn't be 
expected to do this alone. So we are saying that if you do the job 
right--fairly and equitably--you can be eligible to receive a best 
practices development grant--to help pay for programs dealing with 
advanced training.
  To help pay for the computer technology that is necessary to collect 
the data and statistics we have demanded.
  We'll help pay for video cameras and recorders for your patrol cars.
  We'll help pay for establishing or improving systems for handling 
complaints alleging ethnic or racial profiling.
  We'll help to establish management systems to ensure that supervisors 
are held accountable for the conduct of subordinates.
  But if you don't do the job right, there is the stick. If State and 
local

[[Page S1692]]

law enforcement agencies refuse to implement procedures to end and 
prevent profiling, they will be subject to a loss of Federal law 
enforcement funds.
  Let me be clear, this bill is not about blaming law enforcement, and 
it is not designed to prevent law enforcement from doing its job. In 
fact, we believe that it will help our officers maintain the public 
trust they need to do their jobs.
  If race is a part of a description of a specific suspect involved in 
an investigation, this law does not prevent that information from being 
distributed. But stopping people on a random or race-based hunch will 
be outlawed. Race has been a never-ending battle in this country. It 
began with our constitution, when the founding fathers argued over the 
rights of slaves. And then we fought a war over race. We fought a war 
that ripped our country apart.
  Our country emerged whole, but discrimination continued for decades--
discrimination sanctioned in part, unfortunately, by our own Supreme 
Court.
  But our country's history has always been about change, about growth, 
about recognizing those things that weaken us from within.
  A generation ago, we began to fight another war--a war founded in 
peaceful principles, but a war that killed our heroes, burned our 
cities, and shook us once again to the very core.
  But we advanced, with important civil rights initiatives like the 
Voting Rights Act. Like the public accommodations law. We demanded and 
gained laws to fight discrimination in employment, in housing, in 
education. Today, it is time for us to take another step. Racial 
profiling has bred humiliation, anger, resentment and cynicism 
throughout this country. It has weakened respect for the law--by 
everyone, not just those offended.
  Simply put--it is wrong and we must end it. Today we pledge to do 
just that--to define it, to ban it, and to enforce that ban.
                                 ______