NCJ Number
207425
Journal
Illinois Law Enforcement Executive Forum Dated: July 2001 Pages: 15-23
Editor(s)
Thomas J. Jurkanin Ph.D.
Date Published
July 2001
Length
9 pages
Annotation
This article examines two racial profiling litigation cases in two suburban municipalities in Chicago, IL, and the challenges to policing policies faced by both municipalities.
Abstract
Claims of racial profiling expose municipalities to multidimensional liability. This article examines two racial profiling litigation cases in two small middle- to upper-middle-class suburbs with relatively small minority populations in Chicago, IL (Martinez versus Village of Mount Prospect and Ledford versus Highland Park) which were based on employment claims and not liability issues for private citizens. Prior to the examination of these two cases, the article discusses the role of groups, such as the ACLU, involved in the remediation of discriminatory activity in an attempt to assist municipal legal advisors in understanding the ultimate objectives of these types of groups. These two Illinois cases show a legal attack from a direction other than by an organization like the ACLU. These allegations arose from employment suits and not citizen complaints. In the first case of Martinez versus Village of Mount Prospect, the Village was sued by a Hispanic police trainee who claimed discrimination based on his national origin. The second case of Ledford versus Highland Park arose out of an employment action which alleged a host of retaliatory actions directed against officers for union activities. Both municipalities have embarked on bold programs to address racial profiling. The lessons drawn from these two cases provide legal advisors some tools to help protect their municipal clients. In order to defend against racial profiling claims, it is essential that departments develop written policies specifically prohibiting discriminatory enforcement tactics and generally regulating the conduct of employees, both toward the public and toward one another.