"Hot Topics in Anthropology"
Scientific Writing/Speaking 566
Spring 2002

Many topics under debate today can be claimed as anthropological arguments in some form.

"What is Racial Profiling?"
There is no exact definition for racial profiling, although there are many examples of racial profiling. The reason for this may be the term "racial profiling" is debatable in itself. Every individual has a different opinion on what it is or is not. From looking at everyone's opinions, an appropriate definition could be the singling out of an individual by police or law officials as a potential suspect based on race.

September 11th (2001) led to racial profiling becoming a hot topic in our society. But racial profiling is a lot older than this recent incident. One of the most famous incidents is that of Korematsu vs. the U.S., the Supreme Court case after Pearl Harbor in 1941. This case documented the Japanese internment camps in the U.S. After the attack on Pearl Harbor, the U.S. decided that it was in the interest of national safety to take all Americans of Japanese ancestry, including natural born citizens, and place them in the equivalent of prisoner of war camps throughout the U.S. This case justified what the government had done, singling out those of a certain race, because racial classifications are legally allowable if they are "narrowly tailored" to a "compelling governmental interest."

In this current case, airline officials and police had been debating whether or not it was a violation of the US constitution to allow people in airports and other public places to be singled out and more thoroughly searched because of their Middle Eastern race. This would mean that instead of randomly picking people to be searched as is normally done, the suspects would be classified according to skin color, dress, and conduct, for example: reading the Quran or praying. They could use "common characteristics" (characteristics shared by the terrorists) in identifying possible suspects.

Some, like Attorney General John Ashcroft, believe racial profiling is illegal and unconstitutional. They argue that this system is ineffective because there are 40 countries that Al-Qaeda, the terrorist group, originates from. Some of these include Malaysia, Philippines, Latin America, and the Middle East. Most of the passengers on board airlines are also of American citizenship, and for the most part Christian, unlike Al-Qaeda, which is Muslim. The actions, which airlines and others would take, are intimidating to the whole group of Arab Americans, of which a possible one percent would be serious suspects.

Others, like Republican U.S. Representative John Cooksey of Monroe, argue that it would be too difficult to search everyone, so racial profiling would make it easier to pick more likely suspects to search, and this would increase the emotional security of those on flights. In many articles and studies done after the terrorist incident, Arab Americans said they would not mind being searched more thoroughly if it increased their sense of safety.
They also argue that Arab Americans are going to be profiled by passengers, and if this is the case, the passengers will feel more secure with these people being on board then if they are just randomly let on.

The debate is still ongoing in the Supreme Court. So far 125 people have been detained through these means, showing there is some legitimacy to this tactic, but many are worried that this small number just doesn't hold enough support of something that can build into a landslide of more racism and prejudice for all.