What Leadership Conference Interns are doing to Broaden Discussions about Profiling
By Angela Pavao, a Fall 2014 Leadership Conference Education Fund Intern
On Tuesday, December 2, The Leadership Conference Education Fund interns hosted the final segment of our Faces of Profiling discussion series on discriminatory profiling in the United States. We designed the series to spark a wider dialogue about profiling and consider solutions through both policy-based and societal perspectives.
During the first discussion on November 6, Jennifer Bellamy of the American Civil Liberties Union and Sarah Reece of the National LGBTQ Task Force discussed street-level profiling, highlighting its pervasiveness and explaining that many manifestations of profiling are vastly under-acknowledged – both in law and in conversation on the issue. The second event on November 13, which focused on counterterrorism profiling, featured Jasbir Bawa from the Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF) and Jumana Musa from the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. The discussion revealed a culture of fear and misperception that permeates into law, giving law enforcement a blank check to discriminate and violating the rights of countless individuals. Finally, Laura Vazquez from the National Council of La Raza and Jheanelle Wilkins from The Leadership Conference joined us for the third discussion examining profiling in immigration enforcement. Participants came to see how national, state-level, and agency-specific policies all play a role in discrimination, though Laura noted a slow, positive shift away from strategies aimed at self-deportation and towards those involving societal integration.
Attendees of the three discussions came from a diverse array of organizations. Some are already directly involved in profiling work. Many, however, came in with broader or varied lenses, such as drug policy, LGBTQ rights, and even veterans affairs. Despite their different backgrounds, everyone seemed to recognize that the systemic problem of profiling intersects with a wide range of other issues and requires a response from all segments of our population, not just those directly affected by it.
Gaps in current policy play a significant role in the prevalence of discriminatory profiling and, therefore, were one of the main points of conversation over the course of the series. In the end, however, discussions reflected the complex reality that solutions must extend beyond legislation. For example, the speakers in our first discussion cited egregious cases of intentional and targeted profiling, but also discussed the role of unconscious, implicit bias and mistrust. The counterterrorism discussion started with gaps in executive guidance and law, but veered into the topic of stereotypes and the portrayal of certain ethnic groups in popular media. Finally, the immigration talk covered the implications of President Obama’s recent executive action, but also made a connection to recent calls for community-policing programs and their relevance to Latino populations.
We hope that these discussions informed, expanded dialogue, and sparked a passion for learning more about these issues – and will ultimately encourage those who attended to take action.