Race

Question 1

City of St. Paul v Uber (minority view on race)

Answer 1

Facts: Officer saw car and ran plates and found out lived 20 miles away. Was in an area where there is alot of prostitution and the area was predominately black and D was white

Holding: No RS, no one from any suburb needs to justify their lawful presence on a public street…Race should not be used in RS analysis

Question 2

US v Weaver (majority view rule on Race)

Answer 2

Rule: While race cannot be the only factor supporting a stop, it can be considered together with other suspicious factors

Question 3

Can race be a relevant factor in the RS analysis

Answer 3

Yes; US v Ramos (D’s were middle eastern)
US v Weaver

Question 4

What are the 4 view of Racial profiling for RS

Answer 4

1. It’s irrational and ineffective and shouldn’t be used (St. Paul v Uber) - minority view
2. its rational and police should do it (US v Weaver/ US v Ramos) - majority view
3. its rational and works but police shouldn’t use it because its unamerican
4. it should only be used for security/terrorism but not domestic crimes