Federal, state, and local authorities are engaging in discriminatory profiling on a broad scale in the name of national security. Federal agencies conduct suspicionless searches and arbitrary detentions of Arabs and Muslims; subject racial, religious, and other minorities to additional screening at airports and border crossings; and “map” minority communities around the country based on crude stereotypes. State and local governments conduct discriminatory surveillance of innocent American Muslims and facilitate the collection of reports on activities that are deemed “suspicious” but are in fact innocent and protected by the First Amendment.
These practices are constitutionally suspect and stigmatize entire communities instead of focusing on individualized evidence of criminal activity. Using race, the color of someone’s skin, religion, or ethnicity as a basis for suspicion or investigation is unconstitutional and unfair. It harms our national security by wasting scarce government resources and eroding minority communities’ trust in government. It is a practice that should be left in the history books, where it belongs.
The ACLU has taken a multi-faceted approach to challenging discriminatory policies, including litigation on behalf of the victims of discriminatory and unlawful surveillance and suspicious activity reporting as well as raising awareness of the corrosive effect of discriminatory profiling on affected communities. Also, the ACLU has long advocated for changes to the federal government’s guidance on the use of race, religion, ethnicity, and other classifications by federal law enforcement agencies; its guidance allows these offensive practices and the targeting of minority communities for recruitment and use of informants.
- Know Your RightsFebruary 27, 2015
- Know Your RightsDecember 20, 2016
- MapDecember 19, 2016
- Blog Post - Washington MarkupJune 20, 2016
The 75th Anniversary of E.O. 9066 Is a Solemn Reminder to Fight Back Against the Trump Administration’s FearmongeringBlog Post - Speak FreelyFebruary 19, 2017
Darweesh v. Trump - Plaintiffs' Opposition to The Motion To Dismiss and Reply Regarding Preliminary InjunctionLegal DocumentFebruary 17, 2017
- CaseFebruary 17, 2017
Latif, et al. v. Holder, et al. - Declaration of Hugh Handeyside in Support of Plaintiffs' Memo in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of JurisdictionLegal DocumentFebruary 10, 2017
- Legal DocumentFebruary 10, 2017
Latif, et al. v. Holder, et al. - Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of JurisdictionLegal DocumentFebruary 10, 2017