As the busy holiday travel season begins, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection division of the Department of Homeland Security has once again begun traffic “checkpoints” on I-91 south of White River Junction. The purpose is to prevent terrorists from entering the country.
The ACLU-Vermont has received numerous inquiries about the stops. Most travelers -- Vermonters and visitors alike -- are incensed at this intrusion into their lives. Everyone is made to feel a suspect. Citizens should not have to prove their innocence to government officials.
Click here for information about how to file a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security regarding the stops.
Security experts call stops such as these "security theater." The stops may make some people feel safer, but the stops are ineffective as a tool to stop terrorists. There are alternative routes around the stops, as indicated on any publicly available map.
The Border Patrol reports that arrests have been made at the stops. But the arrests have been for relatively minor immigration violations, not terrorist activities. (One person was apparently cited for a windshield violation; she had hung a keepsake from her rear-view mirror, which is illegal.)
Almost everyone -- even drivers supporting the stops -- has asked if the stops are legal. They are. The Border Patrol has the authority to operate stops within 100 miles, as the crow flies, of an international border. The White River stop is 97 miles from Canada.
While the stops themselves are legal, the legality of certain practices that Border Patrol officers can use at the stops is not as clear. What questions, and how many, can officers ask? Can officers search a car? Can officers arrest someone for a criminal offense that has nothing to do with immigration control? Can officers "profile" people of a certain race or ethnicity and interrogate them more extensively than others?
These are tricky questions. Answers have come largely through court cases rather than through statutes debated and agreed upon by Congress. For the most part:
• Officers have broad discretion in the questions they ask, and who they single out for lengthy interrogation and verification of citizenship.
• Officers generally can only search cars if they have a warrant, or have probable cause to believe someone in the car is in violation of a law. Officers may, however, do a visual search of a car by looking in the windows. It is only at checkpoints at the border, or their "functional equivalent" near the border, where officers have virtually unlimited power to do searches.
• Officers may make arrests for offenses other than immigration law violations. They must follow usual procedures concerning reasonable suspicion and probable cause.
• The upgrading of a stop from "temporary" to "permanent" status (as the Border Patrol wanted to do through a $9-million construction project several years ago) is important. The upgrade could result in a change in the legal status of the stop, giving the Border Patrol broader authority.
Many of the complaints received by the ACLU concern allegations of racial profiling. The Border Patrol has denied that racial profiling is occurring, but anecdotally it appears that Caucasians of European descent are rarely detained for extensive questioning, while people of color, Hispanics, Middle Easterners, and Asians are singled out. Op-ed pieces that have appeared in The Boston Globe and other papers have termed the I-91 stop “The Whiteness Checkpoint.”
Here are some things you can do to oppose the stops:
• We would like to hear from people who have passed through the stops and have been asked more than one or two perfunctory questions. Please e-mail us at info@acluvt.org. Include the approximate date and time of the stop, the questions you were asked and the length of the questioning, your race or ethnicity, and the names of any officers you may remember. Gathering additional data will help us in analyzing the situation, and possibly bringing litigation.
• A resolution in the Vermont House, JRH 5, opposes the Border Patrol stops. The resolution is currently in the House Transportation Committee. Call your local representative(s) in the Vermont House and ask that they support JRH 5 and press leadership to have the resolution moved out of committee and onto the House floor for a vote.
• Our congressional delegation in Washington has also opposed the stops. Contact Sen. Patrick Leahy, Sen. Bernard Sanders, and Rep. Peter Welch (contact information available through the “Links” feature on our site) and tell them you oppose the stops. If enough citizens speak out against the stops, perhaps they will be removed and we can once again drive freely on our highways.
• The Department of Homeland Security has an officer for civil rights and civil liberties who receives complaints about civil liberties violations. The process for filing a complaint is described at the Department of Homeland Security Web site. The contact information for the civil rights and civil liberties officer is:
Daniel W. Sutherland
Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528
|
