Introduction
The United States of America prides itself on being the most racially diverse country in the world. Citizens of this country come from diverse backgrounds and there are laws in place to ensure that all people are treated equally. Racial equality is particularly emphasized and Chaires et al. (2009) state that few, if any, public agents would declare that they support any kind of discrimination based on race. Despite this, there have risen allegations of racial profiling by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO). The office has been accused by civil liberty organizations, most notably of which are the American Civil Liberties Union, of engaging in widespread and illegal racial profiling. MCSO continues to deny these allegations and maintains that it treats all races equally. This paper will argue that the Maricopa County Sherriff’s Office in Phoenix Arizona does indeed engage in racial profiling. Scholarly articles, as well as media sources documenting racial profiling by sheriffs from this office, will be used to buttress this assertion.
MCSO Engaging in Racial Profiling
While many states have some isolated incidents of racial profiling, Arizona has been earmarked as the State with a significant amount of racial profiling cases. Most of these incidents involving the MCSO have been under the guise of enforcing immigration policies which were enacted under Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070. MCSO deputies regularly conduct raids on worksites that are suspected of harboring illegal immigrants. ACLU (2009) notes that many of the raided worksites employ Hispanics and other minority groups. The deputies, who are heavily armed, demand registration documents and if a worker does not have them, then he or she can be detained. The ACLU (2009) iterates that MCSO deputies are in the habit of “sacrificing the rights and well-being of workers in the name of immigration enforcement”.
Police officers in Arizona are legally empowered to stop people and question them if they have probable cause for doing this. Withrow (2010) notes that the majority of the victims of this random scrutiny by the police are Hispanics. This is undoubtedly racial profiling since Hispanics do not make up the vast majority of the population in Arizona. Chaires, et al. (2009, p.90) state that racial profiling is evident when one group of persons can move between places without fear of being stopped by law-enforcement officers for capricious reasons while another group has to take into consideration the fact that they may be subjected to extra scrutiny. The freedoms of the Hispanic community are therefore infringed on by MCSO deputies.
There have been numerous incidents of MCSO deputies dealing harshly with minorities without provocation. Hensley (2010) reports that 2 lawsuits were issued against MCSO for deputies allegedly enforcing laws selectively to target Hispanic residents. In these particular cases, the deputies used excessive force when dealing with the minorities who were not guilty of any offense. Hensley (2010) notes that these are not isolated cases and the deputies are reputed for dealing more severely with Hispanics than with the white population.
While other states are investing more resources to tackle crime and ensure public safety, MCSO is dedicating even more resources to hunt out illegal immigrants. In April 2008, MCSO hired 15 deputies whose primary job was to seek out and arrest undocumented residents (ACLU, 2009). These arrests were to be conducted mostly using traffic stops and roadblocks. While rooting out illegal immigrants is a commendable job, it is almost impossible to do this without resorting to racial profiling. Withrow (2010) states that it is unlikely that an officer can stop a driver who appears to be an immigration violator without considering the individual’s ethnicity prior to the traffic stop.
A Case for MCSO and Counterarguments
For all the accusations aimed at MCSO, the office employs many Hispanics and as a matter of fact, MCSO has an over-representation of Hispanic officers. If the office were as racist as it has been claimed, it is unlikely that the MCSO would employ as many Hispanics in its ranks as is the current case. Kearny Police Chief Joe Martinez declares that there is a large number of Hispanics in Arizona Law enforcement and concerns about racism were therefore unfounded (Engstrom, 2010, p.385). While it is true that there are many Hispanics in MCSO, this does not negate the fact that deputies still carry out arbitrary arrests and searches on Hispanics as a result of racial profiling.
Senator Russell Pearce who authored the tough immigration law that has led to the alleged racial profiling in Arizona states that “the measure can be fairly implemented without racial profiling or discrimination” (Engstrom, 2010, p.385). This assertion is corroborated by Kobach (2010) states that S.B. 1070 explicitly prohibits racial profiling by law-enforcement officials. While it is true that racial profiling is prohibited by the law, this does not stop officers from engaging in it. Officers are given discretion in enforcing the law which results in some of them treating individuals unequally.
Maricopa County’s Sherriff, Joe Arpaio who has earned the title of “Toughest Sheriff in America” asserts that the tough immigration laws adopted by MCSO are necessary since the federal government has failed in its duty to secure the border and prevent illegal immigration (Engstrom, 2010). Arpaio goes on to reveal that some rural areas in Arizona are the routes through which illegal immigrants gain entry into the US. Smugglers also bring in arms and drugs through this region. As such the tough actions taken by MCSO in their quest to find illegal immigrants are justifiable. These accusations by MCSO fail to consider the resources that the federal government through the United States Border Patrol (USBP) has inputted. In 2005, the Federal government launched the Secure Border Initiative which is a multibillion-dollar program aimed at protecting US borders from illegal immigrants and smugglers. Haddal (2010) notes that the Southwest Border region has been given the prevalence in this program.
Conclusion
The numerous lawsuits filed against Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office on allegations of illegal arrests and racial profiling suggest that MCSO deputies may indeed be guilty of racial profiling. The actions by MCSO have received wide condemnation from Civil rights groups and even the Federal government as was evidenced by President Obama’s statement criticizing the Arizona immigration Law. Perry (2009) notes that because of racial profiling, the ideal of an America that is fully integrated remains to be a myth.
From the arguments forwarded in this paper, it is clear that MCSO deputies engage in racial profiling and thus violate the civil liberties of many Americans. This practice is detrimental since it victimizes innocent citizens and fosters enmity. Racial profiling undermines trust between law enforcement-officers and the community thus reducing the effectiveness of law enforcement efforts. All progressive minded citizens of the US should therefore make calls against racial profiling and work towards the creation of a fully integrated society.
References
American Civil Liberties Union (2009). ACLU Sues Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office for Illegal Arrest and Detention of U.S. Citizen and Legal Resident. Web.
Chaires, R.H., Barthe, E. & Lentz, A.S. (2009). Talking the talk and walking the walk of racial profiling: a study of automobile checkpoint law in three nations. Texas Hispanic Journal of Law and Policy, 16(2), 87-120.
Engstrom, R.M. (2010). Arizona Officials Rebut Racial-Profiling Charges. Human Events, 13 (1), 31-33.
Haddal, C.C. (2010). Border Security: The Role of the U.S. Border Patrol. Washington: Congressional Research Service.
Hensley, J.J. (2010). 2 lawsuits vs. Sheriff’s Office allege racial profiling. The Arizona Republic. Web.
Kobach, W.K. (2010). Defending Arizona: Its statute will withstand the inevitable -and already begun – challenges in court. National Review.
Perry, B. (2009). ‘There’s just places ya’ don’t wanna go’: the segregating impact of hate crime against Native Americans. Contemporary Justice Review, 12 (4), 401–418.
Withrow, L.B. (2010). Racial Profiling Controversy: What Every Police Leader Should Know. NY: Looseleaf Law Publications.