principle, particularly when it came to those adherence of the muslim faith that our war is not against this islamic religion but against those who would corrupt it distort it misuse it in the name of terrorism. i thank you for your testimony. congresswoman judy chu represents the 32nd district in california. since 2009. she was the first chinese american woman elected to congress. she chairs the congressional asian pacific american caucus, formerly served in the california state assembly. we're honored that you're here today. proceed. >> thank you, senator. as chair of the congressional asian pacific american caucus, i'm grateful for the opportunity to speak here today about ending racial profiling in america. asian-americans and pacific islanders like other minority communities have felt the significant effects of racial profiling throughout american history. from the chinese exclusion act to the japanese american interment and the post 9/11

racial profiling of arab, sikhs, muslims and south asian-americans we know what it's like to be targeted by our own government. it results in harassment, bullying, and sometimes even violence. in the house judiciary committee we recently listened to the anguished testimony of sikh americans constant lehoux mill yates as they were pulled out of lines at airports because of turbines and made to wait in glass cages like animals on display. pulled into rooms to be interrogated for hours, and even infants were searched. this has forced sikh americans and muslim americans to fly rles frequently or remove religious attire. and just last year, i was shocked to learn about the activities of the new york police department and the cia, who were secretly spying on muslim americans.

despite the lack of evidence of wrong doing officers were monitoring muslim american communities and eavesdropping on families, recording everything from wear they prayed to the restaurants they ate in. the nypd entered self-stated in the northeast to monitor muslim student organizations at college campuses. these students had done nothing suspicious. the only thing they were guilty of was of practicing islam. this type of behavior by law enforcement is a regression to some of the darkest periods of our history where we mistrusted our own citizens and spied on their daily lives and it has no place in our modern society. when law enforcement uses racial profiling against a group it replaces trust with fear and hurts communication. the community and law enforcement, instead, need to be partners to prevent crimes and assure the safety of all americans. when the civil libertied of any

group is violated we all suffer. in fact, over 60 years ago, during world war ii, 120,000 japanese americans lost everything that they had and were relocated to isolated interme interment camps throughout the country because of hysteria and scapegoating. in the end not a single case of espionage was ever proven, but there were not enough voices to speak of against this injustice. today, there must be those voices that will speak up. we must stand up for the rights of all americans. that is why i urge all members of congress to support the end racial profiling act. we must protect the ideals of justice and equal protection under the law so that our country is one where no one is made to feel unsafe, unequal, or un-american because of their faith or ethnicity. thank you. >> thank you, congresswoman. the next witness, congresswoman

fredricka wilson, she represents the 17th congressional district which is, i understand, includes sanford, florida. previously, she served in the florida house of representatives from 1999 to 2002. and the florida senate from 2003 to 2010. congresswoman wilson, thank you for joining us today, and proceed. >> thank you. to represent miami where trayvon is from, he was murdered in sanford. thank you. thank you, chairman durbin, ranking member graham and senator bloomen that and other members of the subcommittee. i thank you for inviting me to testify today on the issue of racial profiling. last week, after 45 days, an arrest was finally made in the shooting death of my constituent, trayvon martin. trayvon was a 17-year-old boy, walking home from a store.

he was unarmed and sfrply walking with skittles and iced tea. he went skiing in the winter and horseback riding in the summer. his brother and best friend is a senior at florida international university of miami. a middle class family, but that didn't matter. he was still profiled, followed, chased and murdered. this case has captured international attention and will go down in history as a textbook example of racial profiling. his murder affected me personally, and it broke my heart again. i have buried so many young black boys, it is extremely traumatizing for me. when my own son, who is now a school principal, learned how to drive, i bought him a cell phone because i knew he would be profiled, and he was. he is still fearful of law enforcement and what they might do when he is driving.

i have three grandsons, a 1, a 3, a 5-year-old. i hope key can solve this issue before they receive a driver's license. i pray for them even now. there's a real tension between black boys and the police, not percei perceived, but real. if you waublg to alk to any inn school and ask, have you ever been racially profiled? everyone will raise their hands, boys and girls. they've been followed as they shop in stores, stopped by the police for no apparent reason, and they know, at a young age, they will be profiled. i'm a staunch child advocate. i don't care what color the child is. i was a school principal, a school board member, a state legislator, and now in congress. i desperately care about my welfare of all children. they are my passion. but i've learned from my experiences that black boys in

particular are at risk. years of economic and legal d disenfranchi disenfranchisement, legacy of slavery and jim crow led to economic disparities and prejudice against black boys and men. trayvon martin was a victim of the legacy. the legacy that has led to fear, this legacy that has led to the isolation of black males, this legacy has throws racial profiling. trayvon was murdered by someone who thought he looked suspicion. i established the council on social status of black men and boys in the state of florida when i was in the state senate. i believe we need a council or commission like this on the national and federal level. everyone should understand that ooh our entire society is impacted. a federal commission on the social status of black men and boys should be established specifically to focus on alleviating correcting the

underlying causes of higher race of school expulsions and suspensions, homicides and incarcerations, poverty, violence, drug abuse, as well as income, health and educational disparities among black males. i have spent 20 years billing a mentoring and dropout prevention program for at-risk boys in miami-dade public school, it's called the 5,000 role models of excellent project. boys are taught not only how to be productive members of society by emulating moaner tos who are role models in the community, also taught how to respond to racial profiling. it is sad reality that we have to teach boys these things just to survive in their own communities, but we do. we need to have a national conversation about racial profiling now. not later. the time is now to stand up and address these issues and fight injustice that exists throughout our nation.

enough is enough. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, congresswoman. unless my colleagues have question of this panel, i will allow them to return to their senate house duties. thank you very, very much for being here today. now, we'll turn to our second pan of witnesses. and each of them will please take their place at the witness table. before you take your seats, i'll wait everyone's in place, please stand to be sworn. we have everyone here.

ask the witnesses to please raise their right hand. do you affirm the testimony you're about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> i do. >> thank you very much. let the record reflect that the witnesses all answered in the affirmative. the first witness is ronald davis. chief of police for the city of east palo alto, california, since 2005. before that, 19 years with the oakland police department where he rose to the range of captain. served on the federal monitoring teams overseeing police reform consent decrees between the u.s. department of justice, washington, d.c., and detroit. among other publications he's co-authored the justice department monograph, how to correctly collect and analyze racial profiling data. your reputation depends on it.

he has a bachelor's of science degree from southern illinois university in carbondale. he testified at both the previous senate hearings of racial profiling and sorry it's been so long since we've resumed this conversation. but it's an honor to have you return a few years later to bring us up to date. at this point, chief davis, the floor is yours for five minutes. >> good morning, mr. chairman and distinguished subcommittee members. i am ronald davis, currently chief of police for the city of east palo alto, california. i am humbled to provide testimony at today's hearing, as mentioned i did have the honor testifying at last senate hearings on racial profiling in 2001. when asked to come before the committee today the first thought was a question, what has changed since my testimony in 2001, when president bush then stated, racial profiling is wrong, we will end it in america. my testimony today is based on three diverse perspectives. first, as a racial profiling police reform expert, second, as

a police executive with over 27 years' experience, working in two of the greatest and diverse communities in the nation, oakland and east palo alto, and third, as a black man and a father of a teenage boy of color. first, as an expert, i think it it's fair to say law enforcement has made progress, albeit limb nitd addressing the issue of racial profiling and bias based policing. the department of the justice civil rights division, through its pattern and practice investigations have worked with law enforcement agencies nationwide to provide guidance on racial profiling policies and promote industry best practices. most recently, the cops office and partnership with the national network for safe communities is working on issues of racial remember, silliation and communities to strengthen relationships and reduce crime and violence in those communities. today there are few police agencies in the that do not have some type of policy prohibiting racial profiling and bias based policing. this progress is undermined by two focal points.

first, there exists no national standard definition for racial profiling that prohibits use of race, national origin or religion except when describing a person. many state and local policies define racial profiling as using race as the sole basis for a stop or any police action. unfortunately this policy is misleading and suggests use race as a factor for anything other than a description is justified, which it is not. simply put, mr. chairman, race is a scripter, not a predictor. to use race when describing someone who just committed a crime is appropriate. however, when we deem a person to be suspicion or attach criminality because of the skin, the clothing they are wearing we are attempting to predict criminality. the problem is that we are seldom right in our results, and always wrong in our approach. the same holds true within immigration context as well because a person looks latino or mexican does not mean theundocu.

yet, according to reach laws in alabama and arizona, the police are not just encouraged to make these discriminatory stopped, they are expected to do so. most police chiefs agree engaging in these activities make our communities less safe. this is within reason i joined the police chief association and 17 current and former law enforcement executives in filing a brief challenging the arizona law. we need to pass the end racial profiling act of 2011. this legislation puts forth a standard definition for racial profiling. it requires evidence based training to curtail the practice and provide support and developing scientific-based data collection and analysis. we need to revise the guidance. this will close as mentioned in the previous testimony's loopholes that could permit unlawful and ineffective profiling. it makes no sense to exclude

religion and national horry again when profiling. i fear that without the legislation, we will continue business as usual. and only respond to issues when they surface through high profile tragedies such as the case in oakland and the trayvon martin case in florida. the second factor that undermines our progress is the dire need for us to reform the entire criminal justice system. the last top to bottom review of our system was conducted in 1967, through the president's commission on law enforcement, administration of justice. we must now examine the entire system through a new prism that protects against in equiequitieh as racial profiling. i strongly encourage the passage of the national criminal justice commission act of 2011. mr. chairman, interest my perspective as a police executive with 27 years, i know firsthand how ineffective racial profiling is. as an example, in east palo alto, my community, we are more than 95% of color.

60% latino, approximately 30% african-american, and a growing asian and pacific islander community. in 2005, the city experienced the second highest murder per capita rate in california and the fifth highest in the united states. in january 2006, with the six months serving as chief of police, east palo alto officer richard may shot and killed on line of duty by a parolee three months out of prison. wit the crime rate and violence against the police officer, my community had to choices, either declare war on parolees or engage in enforcement activities that would further the incarration of young men in color or do something different. we chose to strengthen our relationships. we chose not engage in racial profiling. we starred a parolee department, provide re-entry services. police officers now are part of

treatment. we provide cognitive life skills, together we were able to reduce the recidivism rate to over 60% to under 20%. after five years the murder rate in 2011 was 47% lower than 2005. our incarceration rates have dropped and i have very confidence in saying we have better police and community relations. for me and my community we recognize that racial profiling, that the focus on people of color especially young men are more likely to occur when law enforcement uses race to start guessing. i'm here to really reinforce that is an ineffective police practicing, it is sloppy, counting on guesswork. the notion that we as a community or we as a nation must use racial profiling to make ourselves secure or sacrifice civil liberty is not only false, it wreaks of hypocrisy. if we were worried about

national security in the sense of compromising civil liberties it would make sense, those engaging in racial profiling, would ask for the prohibition of firea firearms. we have lost over 100,000 americans to gun violence since 9/11. that is more than we have lost in terrorism and the wars in afghanistan and iraq combined, yet there's not an equal call for gun laws. i'm not suggesting there should be, i'm offering the idea of compromising civil rights for national security does not work. what is equally troubling with the idea of using race, national origin and religion and the national security context, a nation that is equipped with law enforcement and national security experts second to none, must rely on bias and guesswork to make ourselves secure, versus human intelligence, technology, experience, and the cooperation of the american people. i want to strongly emphasize this point, senator, there is no reason to profile on the basis of race, religion, national

origin or ethnicity. as a black man in america, i am still subject to increased scrutiny from the community from my own profession and country because of the color of my skin. as i mentioned earlier, i'm a father of three, but i have a 14-year-old boy named glenn. and even though i'm a police chief with over 27 years of experience, i know that when i teach my son glenn how to drive, i must also teach him what to do when stopped by the police. a mandatory course by the way for young men of color in this country. as i end my testimony today i want to thank you, mr. chairman, and the rheest of the senator forward your leadership. as much as i was honored to be here today, 10 years ago, 12 years ago, i hope there is no need for me to come back in another ten years. >> thank you, chief davis. since september 7, 2001, anthony romero executive director of the american civil liberties union the large effort civil liberties

organization with over 500 members. he co-authored in defense of our america the fight for civil liberties and the able of terror, he graduated from stanford university law school and princeton and princeton university's woodrow wilson of policy and international affairs. mr. mero, please proceed. >> good morning, senator durban and ranking member graham, senator franken, senator blumenthal. i'm delighted to testify before you today. we are a nonpartisan organization with over half a million members and hundreds of thousands of additional activists and supporters. in 53 state offices nationwide dedicated to the principles of a quality and justice set forth of the u.s. constitution and in our laws protecting individual rights. for decades, the aclu has been at the forefront against all forms of racial profiling. racial profiling is policing

based on stereotypes instead of faxed evidence and good police work. racial profiling fuels fear and mistrust between law enforcement and the very communities they are supposed to protect. racial profiling is not only in effective, it is unconstitutional and violates basic norms of human rights, both at home and abroad. my testimony lays out how race, religion, national origin are used as proxies for suspicion in three key areas of national security, of routine law enforcement and immigration. in the context of national security, recently released fbi documents demonstrates how the fbi targets innocent americans based on race, ethnicity, national origin and first protected political activity. some counterproductive fbi practices waste law enforcement

resources, damage essential relationships with those communities and encourage racial profiling at the state and local level. in my native new york, the new york police department has targeted muslim new yorkers for intrusive surveillance without any suspicion of trimmal activity. according to a series of associated press articles, the new york police department dispatched under cover police officers into muslim communities to monitor daily life in bookstores, cafes, nightclubs and even infiltrated muslim student organizations in colleges and universities such as columbia and yale university. when we tolerate this type of racial profiling and the guise of promoting national security, we jeopardy guise national security and compromise the basic set forth in our constitution. policing base on stereotypes remains an entrenched practice

in routine law enforcement across the country. the tragic story of ray von martin garnered national attention and raised questions about the role of race in the criminal justice system. while we don't yet know how this heartbreaking story will end, we do know that stereotypes played a role in this tragedy and yet they have no place in law enforcement. racial profiling undermines the trust and mutual respect between police and the communities they are there to protect, which is critical to keeping communities safe. additionally, profiling deepens racial in america and conveys the suggestion that some americans do not dee serve equal protection under the law. racial profiling is exploding. state intrusion to federal immigration authority has created a legal regimen in which police are stopped based on race and ethnicity inquiry into their

rim gragz status. the department of justice needs to continue to expand response to these state laws using probust civil rights protections. additionally, congress must defund the department of homeland security 287-g in security community programs which promote racial profiling by turning state and local law enforcement officials into police organizations. when police officers not trained in immigration law are asked to enforce the nation's immigration laws, they routinely resort to racial stereotypes about who looks or sounds foreign. but you can't tell by looking or listening to someone about whether or not they're in the u.s. law -- in order to achieve comprehensive reform, congress needs to provide law enforcement with the tools needed to engage in effective policing. we need to pass the end racial profiling act which would prohibit racial profiling once and for all. and we should urge the administration to strengthen the

department of guidance to address profiling by religion and national origin and to close loopholes for the border and national security. in america 2012 and beyond, policing and stereotypes must not be a part of our national landscape. law enforcement officers must base their decisions on facts in evidence, otherwise, america's right to liberties are unnecessarily discarded and individuals are left to deal with life-long circumstances of such intrusion. on what have of the aclu, i wish to thank each of you for your leadership on this critical issue. i also would like to thank you, chairman durbin in particular to partner with our illinois office to address the issue of profiling. i look forward to working with you in the years ahead. >> thank you, mr. romero. frank gale served for 23 years in the denver county sheriff's department where he had responsibility for the courts and jail.

captain gale is currently the commander of the training academy in the community relations unit and the public information officer. he has received numerous awards and declarations from the internal order of police and the sheriff's department. captain gale, it's an honor to have you here today. please proceed. >> thank you. my name is frank gale. i'm a 23-year veteran in the denver police department and currently hold the rank of captain. i am the national second vice president for the fraternal order of police, representing more than 330,000 rank and file law enforcement officers in every region of the country. i'm here to morning to discuss our strong opposition to end racial profiling act. i want to begin by saying that it is clear racism is morally and ethically wrong. and law enforcement is not only wrong but serves no valid purpose. it is wrong to think a person criminal because of the color of their skin. but it is equally wrong to think

a person is a racist because they wear a uniform and a badge. this still provides a solution to a problem that does not exist unless one believes the problem to be solved is that their universal training is based in practicing racism. this notion makes no sense. especially for anyone who truly understands the challenges we face protecting the communities we serve. criminals come in all shapes, colors and sizes. to be effective as a law enforcement officer, it is necessary to be colorblind as you make determinations about criminal conduct or suspicious activity. there is the mistake and perception on the part of some that the ugliness of racism is part and culture of law enforcement. i'm here today not only to challenge this perception, but to refute it entirely. we can and must restore the bonds of law enforcement and the minority community. to do so would require substantial effort to find real solutions. restoring this trust is critically important because minority citizens often suffer

victims of crime, especially violent crime. i do not believe that f-1670 will help repain the bonds of trust and mutual respect between law enforcement communities. in fact, i think it will make it more difficult because it lends the suggestion that all cops are racist and that we engage in a tactic that has no purpose but to violate citizens. that can result in a base belief by the community that law enforcement officers should not be trusted or respected. this bill proposes to prohibit racial profiling which it defines very broadly and is not a legitimate police practice employed by any law enforcement agency in the united states that i know of. in rand versus the united states, the supreme court made et clear that the constitution based on consideration such as race. further, as one court of appeals has explained, citizens are entitled to equal protections of the law at all time. if law enforcement adopt aes

policy, employs a practice or in a given situation takes steps against a citizen solely on the citizen's race without more then a violation has occurred. the united states constitution prohibits racial profiling. yet here we have a bill that proposes to prohibit it. the premise of the bill seems at odds with common sense and current law. the bill does not prohibit racial profiling as the definition of racial profiling and the bill is far too fraud. it inhibits officers aimed at detemperaturing involved in a crime or criminal activity. the bill purports to allow exceptions to these exceptions when there is a -- of a specific suspect's race or ethnicity, but in real life this is not practical. and the practice of routine investigatory action, law enforcement receive and develop information through a