vs. Highland Park, IL Police
ACLU vs. Colorblind Justice
Be sure to also see Highland Park News, below
The Chicago suburb of Highland Park, Illinois has recently become yet another statistic in
the racial-preference wars. This week, Highland Park and its police department
succumbed to demands by the ACLU that its police engage in "good" racial
profiling of all citizens. According to the ACLU, profiling all
citizens in Highland Park will neutralize an alleged, and unproven, charge of
"bad" racial profiling by the Highland Park Police.
At least when the U.S. Department of Justice persecutes, er, prosecutes a police
department for "racial profiling" they conduct a public relations oriented
"investigation" into the allegations, such as they performed in a very similar
case in Montgomery County, Maryland. Apparently, in the case of Highland Park, the
ACLU doesn't consider such a "show of proof" to be a necessary step in the
In the case of Highland Park, the ACLU, abetted by the current national trend of
"racial profiling hysteria", did not even feel it was necessary to conduct such
a sham investigation. All the ACLU needed were two black citizens of Highland Park,
whose roles were masterfully played by black citizens Michael Ledford and his mother,
Karen Lynn Ledford, who only had to cry "fire" in the crowded theatre of racial
hysteria. The Ledfords charged that the Highland Park Police stopped them simply
because they were black.
That's all the Ledfords had to do. In today's pro-color, anti-white world,
the ACLU did not require that the Ledfords offer any documentation or proof that they were
singled out because of their skin color. All the ACLU required was that the Ledfords
be minorities, i.e., black.
Thus, the Ledford's shout of "fire" is all the Illinois ACLU required to pillory
this suburban police department of Chicago, Illinois.
As a result, on July 12, 2000 the Illinois ACLU has extracted a consent decree from
Highland Park in which police officials agreed unilaterally to collect race, ethnicity,
and gender data for all citizens they stop for any reason. The U.S.
Department of Justice, an ally of the ACLU on this matter, considers this to be
"good" racial profiling.
The ACLU's pro-minority demands which are contained in the consent decree are quite
substantial, and every citizen should be afraid for their constitutional right to
race-blind justice, not to mention the privacy of their racial identity data.
For example, the ACLU's proposed consent decree with Highland Park states, in part,
"For every incident involving a stop, detention, interrogation and/or search,
officers must document and record information including the name and identification number
of the officer(s) involved; data on the civilian involved including the gender, race and
ethnicity of those stopped..."
Hmm. Let's see. If a white citizen is stopped for a traffic offense in
Highland Park, can that citizen tell the officer that they choose to not have their
private, personal racial data recorded? I don't think so. Can any
color citizen decline to have their private, personal racial data recorded? Nope,
not according to the ACLU, and certainly not according to the U.S. Department of Justice.
In today's unabashedly pro-minority atmosphere, making a charge of "racial
profiling" is the modern equivalent of crying "fire" in a crowded
theatre. Everyone always pays attention to such a cry and, after the fact,
government officials occasionally try to clean up the debris.
Except that in Highland Park no one is cleaning up the debris, and the cry of
"fire" has been allowed to stand even though no smoke, not to mention flames,
have ever been seen by any witness.
Neither the ACLU nor Highland Park officials have issued any public comment pertaining to
(a) any investigation and/or proof supporting the complaint of racially discriminatory
treatment by the black citizens (the Ledfords); and (b) any investigation and/or proof of
racially discriminatory behavior by the Highland Park police department.
Apparently, Highland Park was so intimidated by this unsubstantiated cry of
"fire" (i.e., the threat of negative publicity by the racial lobby, by the ACLU,
and by the U.S. DOJ) that Highland Park officials simply agreed to tear up the U.S.
Constitution and racially profile everybody in order to appease the ACLU and its
lawsuit on behalf of the Ledfords.
As a result of the consent decree with the ACLU, Highland Park Police must now racially
profile each and every person they stop for any reason, and the ACLU has further demanded
that the police install video and audio recording devices in all police cruisers to
document the stops. Adversity.Net notes that the ACLU has not required that
private citizens install similar recording equipment in their private automobiles.
But perhaps non-minority citizens should consider doing exactly that.
According to the ACLU consent decree, the racial profiles maintained by the Highland Park
Police must be made available to ACLU lawyers. If these "good" racial
profiling records reveal that blacks or other protected minorities actually commit more
traffic offenses and other crimes than non-protected races, the ACLU will subsequently be
allowed to shout "fire" (i.e., "disparate impact" or "racial
profiling"). But god help you if you are "white" and if you have the
temerity to make a similar claim.
Additional Reading - Highland Park Links and Background:
[AP - FoxNews link http://www.foxnews.com/national/0712/d_ap_0712_245.sml
[ACLU Press Release link http://www.aclu.org/news/2000/n071200a.html
ACLU Forces Racial Profiling of ALL
Citizens in Highland Park (09/28/00)
"A federal judge on Wednesday approved a pact between Highland Park and the American
Civil Liberties Union that allows the [ACLU] to look over arrest records and traffic stops
in the north suburb to make sure that racial profiling [against preferred minorities] is
not taking place.
"The court-ordered decree gives the ACLU the most comprehensive guidelines on racial
profiling in the state. "This decree is cutting edge, a state-of-the-art tool
designed to prevent and guard against racial profiling in communities nationwide,"
said Harvey M. Grossman, legal director for the ACLU of Illinois."
ACLU failed to mention any efforts to protect the civil rights of non-minorities
(Caucasians) stopped for traffic violations in Highland Park, Illinois.
The Chicago Sun-Times reports that "Police in Highland Park will be barred in most
cases from considering the race of individuals they detain, interrogate or who are targets
of surveillance, and must keep strict records on such encounters." Apparently,
as implied by the Sun-Times, the fact that police must keep strict racial records of their
traffic stops under the ACLU agreement does not violate the agreement that police
"will be barred in most cases from considering the race of individuals they detain,
interrogate or who are targets of surveillance." If police are barred from
considering the race of citizens they stop for traffic violations, how can they also be
permitted to keep strict racial records of these stops?
"The ACLU sued in July on behalf of Karen Lynn Ledford and her son Michael, who are
black and are longtime residents of the affluent lakefront suburb.
Michael Ledford said "To us, the whole issue was about accountability. This
[ACLU profiling agreement] ensures that there is accountability."
"City officials said they feel vindicated by the judge's ruling. "Think
what you will about the city," said corporation counsel Steven Elrod. "But
Highland Park is now at the forefront of eliminating racial profiling."
Thus, Highland Park's corporation counsel tacitly endorses the idea that traffic crimes
must magically reflect the racial composition of the area. If it turns out that
legitimate traffic stops result in too many "protected minorities" being
stopped, then that fact becomes de facto proof of racial discrimination regardless of the
actual number of "traffic crimes" committed by persons of various racial
denominations. (Based on the Chicago Sun Times story 09/28/00 by Lucio Guerrero)
END Illinois: Highland Park Racially Profiles