updating brignoni-ponce - New York University School of Law

582 LEGISLATION AND PUBLIC POLICY [Vol. 11:567
Even the former policy to release non-Mexican undocumented immigrants
after they received a notice to appear in court was called “catch
and release,” comparing people to fish. 84 This language dehumanizes
and demeans undocumented immigrants.
Some of the groups who are currently subordinated by nativistic
immigration policies are Asians, Latinos, and, particularly since September
11, Middle Easterners. 85 Framing this issue in terms of nativistic
racism avoids the debate of what constitutes race as opposed to
ethnicity. Through this lens, it does not matter whether the Court was
attempting to deliver a race-neutral decision by focusing on a person’s
perceived nationality. 86 Accordingly, this Note adopts a definition of
racial profiling that includes considering a person’s perceived race,
ethnicity, national origin, or religion. 87 Any of these types of profiling
would fall under the notion of nativistic racism—subordination by excluding
the “other.”
3. Immigration Enforcement and Racial Profiling
While an investigatory immigration stop that is solely based on
race is prohibited under current law, the Supreme Court has endorsed
the consideration of race coupled with other factors. 88 Some argue
that this has resulted not only in widespread racial discrimination89 but
also in mistrust of government and law enforcement in some communities.
90 These communities include both immigrants—documented
and not—and citizens. 91
84. Accountability for Security Gaps: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on Homeland
Security, 110th Cong. (2007) [hereinafter Accountability for Security Gaps Hearing]
(testimony of Michael Chertoff, Sec’y, Department of Homeland Security), available
at http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/testimony/testimony_1189114519132.shtm. This policy
has been replaced by “catch and remove,” which requires all undocumented immigrants
to be detained until they can be removed to their countries of origin. Id.
85. See Johnson, Challenging Racial Profiling, supra note 29, 351–52; Perea, R
supra note 61, at 2. I often call these “targeted groups.” R
86. See Thompson, supra note 22, at 978. R
87. See infra note 144 and accompanying text (describing the definition of racial R
profiling adopted in the End Racial Profiling Act). Racial profiling depends on a law
enforcement officer’s perception. Stops based on ethnicity, national origin, or religion
may include other factors besides phenotype.
88. United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 881–87 (1975).
89. See BNHR REPORT TO UNHRC, supra note 83, at 15. R
90. See End Racial Profiling Act (ERPA) of 2007, S. 2481, 110th Cong. § 2(a)(15)
(2007) (“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.”).
91. According to reports of immigration enforcement abuse collected by the American
Friends Service Committee’s Immigration Law Enforcement Monitoring Project
in 1997, victims of such abuse were 61.1% undocumented immigrants, 16.8% United