>> A recent Supreme Court decision is raising concerns about racial profiling in federal law enforcement.

Has immigration raids ramp up.

But locally advocates a discriminatory policing is nothing new.

They believe the Chicago Police Department has a history of disproportionately targeting black and Latino people in shootings.

Traffic stops, arrests and more.

And some advocates worry the high court's ruling could potentially impact local policing.

Joining us now for more on racial profiling are Jasmine Smith, organizer with Chicago Alliance against Racist and political repression.

Kimberly Marshall, a retired Chicago police officer who now works in the mental health field.

Raf Donaldson, professor of law at the Chicago College of Law and Lauren Jones, director of criminal legal Systems at Impact for Equity.

Thanks to all of you for joining us.

Threat.

Want to start with you, please.

Because earlier this month the Supreme Court made a move that makes it easier for federal immigration agents to use ethnicity as a factor in deportations.

Could this ruling spill over into the way?

You know, Chicago police police is our communities.

Well, it could.

So the first thing to mention the Supreme Court actually didn't.

>> Issue any new opinion of any kind?

The Supreme Court just issued an order and said tempers running order issued by the judge out in Central California is not to go into effect.

It's to be stayed.

What happened is that one of the Supreme Court Justice Justice Kavanaugh issued his opinion about what he thought.

the order should go into effect.

Watch it be stayed.

And he mentioned that he thought that racial was okay and had been a approved by previous presidents by the Supreme Court local law enforcement over read with Justice Kavanaugh side let.

its officers use more racial profiling and perhaps they had before.

And of course, that would be, you know, something that if someone wanted to file a claim that would go to court later whole other thing that I hope we get into >> But Lauren, how do you think this could impact Chicago locally, given what we're hearing just today, the ongoing National Guard threats and ice operations in the area.

As you mention, a Chicago has a long history of racial profiling.

And there's been a lot of work done to try to remedy that insurance like the consent decree through policy changes.

>> And advocates organizers are really concerned that the rhetoric and this statement issued by the Supreme Court will have a trickle down effect on tempering some of those advancements you know, opening the door for more profiling to happening from officer to officer that is not remedied at a later date.

And so we are really trying to point to the city to double down on those reform efforts and to really amplify the commitment to the consent decree that has a ban on racial profiling that requires officers to report when they see someone racial profiling, another officer, racial profiling.

And, you know, these comments are in place.

We just need to be sure that we are setting examples as a progressive city to double down.

jasmine, you've had your own personal experiences with racial profiling.

What was that like?

What happened?

>> So it's and Rajan situation being racially profiled being the person was racially profiled.

But luckily my just recently we had periods with table, my organization, Kabul allies, a political repression.

We have volunteers.

They go out and committing these the table.

Information literature will be doing giving away free education and happy people take their rights.

People can get involved.

hold the police accountable stuff pulleys often times.

Abuse they authority and power and and try to scare.

I know our workers even myself, my address where we're going to lock you up.

You have to move.

Issue came to be here and you can do that.

But I know my rights like there's no crime.

Then we are committed giving out free information to the committees.

And of course, the it the situation that we had just a couple weeks ago.

It was we white officer.

It was a little back evening is part was no, we're not trying know.

I paused as well.

You just because he things at away like that.

Britain we want as I'm trying to be nice in guys.

You know, so it sounds like a new felt he was making unnecessary threat.

Seems like they're on this.

Everybody feel like it ever You know, just walking down the street, driving your car.

>> Yes, even drive my car a concealed carry.

poor meal lair that no probable but because they ran my plate Im a that could because they have carry.

pull me over and luckily black woman.

I wasn't like it was no anything.

And my daughter was in a car.

My grandson was in car, but I them what is the reason you put a meal with his?

They didn't you no democracy to carry.

Do you have your gun and, you know, the local?

So I mean, yes and no.

But what is a reasonable to me over concealed-carry?

Not that's not probable cause you guys to be pulled me my head.

I some night a night out my plate despite none of these things.

So they pick chills different ways in different making.

This is the what they want to do to encounter a week community that they feel party are not allowed board a rights law.

No, just look at using intimidation tactic, sickly, expect you wouldn't know how to how to respond.

All according to the Illinois Department of Transportation in Chicago, Black people made 45% of traffic stops by CPD in 2024.

>> But 31% of the city's population Latinos made up.

35 1% of all traffic stops by CPD compared to being 29% of the city's population.

That is all compared to white people making up 15% of stops while being 33% of the population.

Kimberly, want to come back to you or come to you for the first time.

What do you make of some of these ongoing federal threats given the city's long history of racial profiling?

It's unfortunate the Supreme Court, he's not willing to protect those rights that are already in place it's looking more and more like Dred Scott Supreme Court.

As far as I can now my experiences, Chicago police officer.

They don't teach that we shouldn't racial profile.

That's not in part of anything that we were taught in the police academy.

>> As a matter of fact, I was one police department when community policing when they first came out with community policing could use certain force from 1990, to >> So what I saw was that department policy is against that and then an agreement with that decree this free.

but individual officers because they are human beings, they bring their own bias in their own pages.

And so.

You have to I you know, you can't do total blank in and say, well, you know, all the police abandoned all with that.

>> Because the things that they tolerate it, it seems like as a whole is 5 punishing one officer for this and maybe not another officer for the same thing.

And then the individual officers making the decision who should be stopped and who is bad.

So who is good?

ends up being a lot to officer's discretion.

Lauren, why do you mean we just discussed some of these numbers that we got from Illinois Department of Transportation while we still see these disproportionate trends years after the consent decrees, implementation.

>> 6 and a half years.

Yeah.

So I can focus a little bit on just the traffic stop portion to branch off from that.

But there are policies that prevent officers from from engaging in racial bias, often people because of the color of the skin or where they live.

But we are seeing that there's justification is based on, you know, these are those crime in this area or, you know, I wasn't stopping them because they're black.

I'm stopping them because they have a broken tail light.

And so these justifications allowed 4 individual officers and a practices, a whole sort of bend, the policies, bend the Constitution, create loopholes there that allow for racial profiling, too, continue.

And we're seeing even just last year there was 4% increase of what he stops of the teenage drivers from 2020 through 2024.

And so you can see that some of those trends coming from the federal level are being reflected in these individual officers decisions to continue to racially profile and commit excessive stops without seeing any real public safety benefits from those stops.

So wrap.

As we discussed earlier, the Supreme Court decision sort of loosens, you know, whether or not it can happen in can allow officers to sort on the federal level anyways.

What a factor that into their decision-making when choosing to stop someone or pursue someone but because the burden of proof lies with the person who believes that they've been profiled, if that should happen, how does one prove racial profiling in a court of law?

>> Yeah, pretty racial profiling is very difficult because the Supreme Court doesn't allow one to bring justice to court from Ation of the sort that you just mentioned.

So mentioning that people are disproportionately stopped or arrested.

That actually is insufficient evidence because the Supreme Court has that they don't they don't accept that.

That actually proved the actual impact to bring some sort of claim against them.

that's really difficult.

So I think that that's that's one of the barriers that we face legally.

The thing that the plaintiffs brought in the case reached this report.

It was stated instead of bringing evidence, particularly about them being racially profiled.

Instead what the plaintiffs argued is that there wasn't suspicion evidence reasonable suspicion before the stops and the only reason why they could have been stopped as for racist reasons.

You don't have to prove the resort and all you have to prove in situation.

And just wasn't reasonable suspicion in the first And that's what they attempted And despite a favorable treatment by the district court, that report did not a lot of that same thing as saying racial profiling did happen sorry, Kimberly.

So you know, you mentioned that when you are serving on the police force, he weren't, you know, of course, taught to racially profile people.

But was there any training on not racially profiling people on unconscious bias?

Well, they did have sensitivity training one of the things that I want to mention that I think is important is in 1968.

>> Most departments, including the Chicago Police Department acted a program called Salt and Pepper.

What they found was that the backgrounds of the white officers in the black officers, they didn't know each other.

They didn't know about personally.

Make here.

We love their.

That was not a lot up integrating.

And so they started the pepper teams so that the white officers in the black officers could learn more about each other and about each of this community.

It was successful.

I remember officers when I came that border retiring that did work in pepper teams and that it was effective and they did.

They did get to know the black officer and his community and his family better.

So they got a better understand we're almost out of time.

Just want get the last Because along those lines, right, like the police department tried something, then how can police better address crime without disproportionately targeting communities of color?

>> We'll The police have to have mend the number one.

The parties have to come in week.

>> B, if Aaron, on the side of justice and giving people their due process and not by a sleeve.

Judging them off of parents stuff like that.

We have the issue report is not being held accountable.

So we have to look at right now.

More than ever like the superintendent has the bow to address the lot of these cars that are still on the force.

That is they as calls harm to the community.

So you started dressing the rule of issues and clean and now house.

They need to be a lot better.

5 communities in contention was the trust of Foley's.

So it a problem.

Hold them accountable.

They have to be fired.

All right.

the time for grant will have to leave it Not something we're all going to solve right now, but the word lies ahead.

Our thanks