News & Commentary

Almost half of the police departments in the state that are required to post online their police complaint forms and procedures have failed to do so, according to a report released today by the Rhode Island ACLU. The requirement, contained in the Racial Profiling Prevention Act of 2004, was designed to make it easier for victims of police misconduct to file complaints with departments.

The Rhode Island ACLU said today that the release of a national report analyzing incarceration rates across the country demonstrates the need for a broader commitment to address racial profiling and related problems of racial disparities in Rhode Island’s criminal justice system. The report, “Uneven Justice: State Rates of Incarceration by Race and Ethnicity,” was released this past week by The Sentencing Project, located in Washington D.C., and examined nationwide prison statistics for 2005. 

The Rhode Island ACLU today filed a federal lawsuit against the R.I. State Police, challenging the legality of the detention and transporting to immigration officials of fourteen people, all Guatemalans, who were stopped in a van on I-95 on July 11th after the driver changed lanes without using a turn signal. The lawsuit, filed by RI ACLU volunteer attorney V. Edward Formisano on behalf of eleven of the individuals, argues that the actions by the state police violated the state’s Racial Profiling Prevention Act, as well as the driver and passengers’ constitutional rights to be free from discrimination and from unreasonable searches and seizures.

In a 36-page report released today, the ACLU of Rhode Island charged that many police departments in the state are doing very little to address the well-documented problem of racial profiling that exists in their communities, and that changes in various law enforcement policies and practices that contribute to the problem are essential to adequately confront the issue.

The ACLU of Rhode Island today filed an open records lawsuit against the R.I. State Police for refusing to release to the ACLU a copy of a five-minute videotape of a controversial traffic stop of a van with fourteen Guatemalans that took place on I-95 this summer, and for also failing to turn over copies of the agency’s policies governing traffic enforcement procedures.

More than a dozen local community and civil rights organizations today sharply criticized the recent response of R.I. State Police to allegations that the police engaged in racial profiling and improperly detained and transported to immigration officials fourteen people, all Guatemalans, who were stopped in a van on July 11th after the driver failed to use a turn signal. The groups said the incident demonstrated the urgent need for passage of legislation restricting local police from enforcing federal immigration law.

The ACLU of Rhode Island today criticized yesterday’s 4-to-2 court of appeals ruling upholding the state’s 2003 raid of the Narragansett Indian smoke shop as “a very troubling undermining of basic principles of Indian sovereignty.” Last September, the RI ACLU, together with the National ACLU and the National Congress of American Indians, had filed a “friend of the court” brief in the case, arguing that “by executing a search warrant against the Tribe, arresting Tribal officials, and confiscating tribal documents and other property,” the state violated the Tribe’s “sovereign authority over its territory.”

In a 30-page report released today, the ACLU of Rhode Island said that a review of the latest statistics on police department traffic stop searches shows continued evidence of racial profiling in the state. The statistics further demonstrate, said the ACLU, that the search practices are not only unfair and discriminatory, they represent poor police work.

The ACLU of Rhode Island, together with the National ACLU and the National Congress of American Indians, today filed a "friend of the court" brief in the pending appeal between the state of Rhode Island and the Narragansett Indian Tribe over the highly publicized 2003 state police raid of the Tribe's smoke shop. The brief, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston, argues that "by executing a search warrant against the Tribe, arresting Tribal officials, and confiscating tribal documents and other property," the state violated the Tribe's "sovereign authority over its territory."