American Free Press AFP
Last Real Newspaper
Top_bar7About AFPBookstoreArchivesMember Login
left_menu7Free issueSubscribe
left_menu9Online Edition
left_menu13First AmendmentHistoryLinksFirst Amendment
Video clips
Alerts bottom

Institute for Truth Studies

John ellis water

Support AFP: Visit Our Advertisers




Supreme Court Affirmed ‘Racial Profiling’ 35 Years Ago


By James P. Tucker Jr.

Congressional champions of “amnesty” for illegal immigrants, and federal courts that argue that Arizona’s border law includes unconstitutional “profiling,” suffer from ignorance: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1975 that states can protect their borders and profile suspects.

In United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, the high court ruled in 1975 that “the likelihood that any given person of Mexican ancestry is an alien is high enough to make Mexican appearance a relevant factor.”

In 1982, the  Arizona Supreme Court, ruling in State v. Graciano said, “Enforcement of immigration laws often involves a relevant consideration of ethnic factors.”

Since then, absurd denunciations of “racial profiling” have emerged, prompting many legislators and clueless citizens to call such profiling “unconstitutional.” However, lawmen have always profiled, but they called it a “description.” If, for example, the suspect is described as black, police do not pursue a white man. If the suspect is described as fat, police did not pursue thin guys.

Yet, in a challenge to Arizona’s immigration law (S.B. 1070), those in U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department and others argued that profiling is unconstitutional because it will lead to police harassment of “people of color.”

Arizona lawmakers did make a gesture to this political correctness by inserting this language: A “law enforcement official or agency . . . may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution.”

Obviously, the U.S.

Constitution does not preclude “profiling.”

Meanwhile, the U.S. government groveled before the United Nations in a report citing the Arizona immigration law as a violation of “human rights.” By this definition, it is a human right to violate U.S. law by entering the U.S. illegally.


Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer called it “downright offensive” that her state’s immigration law was denounced in a report to a UN council “whose members include such renowned human rights ‘champions’ as Cuba and Libya. The idea of our own American government submitting duly enacted laws of a state . . . to a ‘review’ by the United Nations is internationalism run amok,” Brewer said.

The Bush administration ignored the UN council. The Obama administration reversed this policy because Americans are now “citizens of the world.” The UN will consider the Arizona action at a “Universal Periodic Review,” which will also consider Israel’s killing and torturing of Palestinian civilians in the occupied territories, and beheadings in Somalia.

Brett Schaefer and Steven Groves of the Heritage Foundation wrote in an essay that the United States should quit the UN council. The UN report “has proven to be a flawed process hijacked by countries seeking to shield themselves from criticism,” they wrote.

The UN report also chastises the United States because of differences in levels of education, employment and home ownership among racial and ethnic groups. “We are not satisfied with a situation where the unemployment rate for African-Americans is 15.8 percent, for Hispanics 12.4 percent and for whites 8.8 percent, as it was in February 2010,” it says.

It skips the fact that blacks have equal access with whites to an education, and that the vast majority of Hispanics arrive here with little or no education. Therefore they must work in sectors that are hit hardest during economic downturns such as in construction work, landscaping and food preparation.

AFP editor James P. Tucker Jr. is a veteran journalist who spent many years as a member of the “elite” media in Washington. Since 1975 he has won widespread recognition, here and abroad, for his pursuit of on-the-scene stories reporting the intrigues of global power blocs such as the Bilderberg Group. Tucker is the author of Jim Tucker’s Bilderberg Diary: One Man’s 25-Year Battle to Shine the Light on the World Shadow Government. Bound in an attractive full-color softcover and containing 272 pages—loaded with photos, many never published before—the book recounts Tucker’s experiences over the last quarter century at Bilderberg meetings. $25 from AFP. No charge for S&H in U.S.

Subscribe to American Free Press. Online subscriptions: One year of weekly editions—$15 plus you get a BONUS ELECTRONIC BOOK - HIGH PRIESTS OF WAR - By Michael Piper.

Print subscriptions: 52 issues crammed into 47 weeks of the year plus six free issues of Whole Body Health: $59  Order on this website or call toll free 1-888-699-NEWS .

Sign up for our free e-newsletter here - get a free gift just for signing up!

(Issue # 41, October 11, 2010)

Send this page to a friend! (click here)

Please make a donation to American Free Press

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003

Support AFP: Visit Our Advertisers

Send this page to a friend! (click here)


Health Insurance Quote