Yes, Border Patrol agents are very much allowed to roam a bus or train station and check people’s IDs and immigration status, even if the location isn’t an official checkpoint or border. As long as the place is within 100 miles of the border, it’s game, which I did not know until I posted something quick about it yesterday, and many of you sent a lot of information my way. Thank you.
The New York Times wrote an article about it in 2010, focusing on Amtrak stations in northern border towns, a few miles away from Canada, where (after 9/11) it became routine for passengers to see armed Border Patrol agents interrogating people, “fueled by Congressional antiterrorism spending and an expanding definition of border jurisdiction,” the article says.
It’s also a tactic to combat human and drug smuggling, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials. They say it’s been effective.
All of that is understandable. However, why are only certain people checked and not all? And by certain, I mean people of color with “foreign-sounding” names and accents.
From the article:
The journey also highlights conflicting enforcement policies. Immigration authorities, vowing to concentrate resources on deporting immigrants with serious criminal convictions, have recently been halting the deportation of students who were brought to the country as children without papers — a group the Obama administration favors for legalization.
But some of the same kinds of students are being jailed by the patrol, like a Taiwan-born Ph.D. candidate who had excelled in New York City public schools since age 11. Two days after he gave a paper on Chaucer at a conference in Chicago last year, he was taken from his train seat and strip-searched at a detention center in Batavia, N.Y., facing deportation for an expired visa.
For some, the patrol’s practices evoke the same fears as a new immigration law in Arizona — that anyone, anytime, can be interrogated without cause.
On Sunday night, only four people were interrogated and all of them happened to be Hispanic/Latinos. Why weren’t the other passengers checked?
These type of policies are a huge open door to racial profiling.
In the state, at least with SB 1070, we knew it was coming—we know what it does, how it does it, and so on. But this method I learned about recently has been going on for years and in a very quiet manner.
Opponents say it’s a violation of the Fourth Amendment, which “prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.” I agree. How are these searches not violating that? Sitting in a bus or train is “probable cause?” Having darker skin is “probably cause?”
I understand the justifications on paper, but when you target a certain group of people, that’s just racist.
It’s not just these bus visits, but the checkpoints, too.
I travel to Tubac, Bisbee, Nogales, and Sonoita often. The times I’ve driven through checkpoints and my Swedish, non-citizen, legal resident, blond-haired, green-eyed, tall, beautiful friend is in the car with me, Border Patrol agents don’t even ask her if she is a citizen. The other day, she was driving, and had to answer that no, she isn’t a U.S. citizen. The agent smiled and asked where she was from. “From Sweden,” she said. “Oh, wow, beautiful. Well, have a great day!!!!” She could have been undocumented, but I guess in the eyes of many people, only those with darker skin should be scrutinized.
This article appears in Feb 26 – Mar 4, 2015.
Maria,
I think that reading UNITED STATES v. BRIGNONI-PONCE would be enlightening. It is a decision, from the 70’s, that touches on the issue of racial profiling. In short, race and ethnicity are not enough on their own to warrant a search or a stop, but in conjunction with other factors can help establish reasonable suspicion. Section IV of the decision covers this nicely.
One more thing you should read is the Immigration and Nationality Act, 66 Stat. 233, 8 U.S.C. 1357
This clearly states where and how Border Patrol can search:
“within a reasonable distance from any external boundary of the United States, to board and search for aliens any vessel within the territorial waters of the United States and any railway car, aircraft, conveyance, or vehicle, and within a distance of twenty-five miles from any such external boundary to have access to private lands, but not dwellings, for the purpose of patrolling the border to prevent the illegal entry of aliens into the United States;” (reasonable distance has been decided by the court system to be 100 miles)
Unfortunately, what you or I might interpret as racial profiling most likely is not; The Tucson Greyhound station is within 100 miles of the border, they have every right to ask one person, 3 people, everyone, or nobody their citizenship and to provide proof of it. It is as simple as that.
What I meant to say is that just because we might interpret some actions by the border patrol as racial profiling, it does not necessarily make them violations of the 4th, per the US Supreme Court.
María Inés Taracena, when your “friend”, who happens to be a white, blonde Swede, replied that she was not an American citizen, was the follow-up question, are you here in the country legally? Did she state that she was a legal resident?
If not, then please contact the Border Patrol and your Congress-person and let them know that check-point failed to perform to standards.
Please write a follow-up to this article and answer my question and please inform us of who you contacted to rectify this.
Definitely the checkpoints racially profile (and have a whole lot more problems too). The problem is that all other fairer means of enforcement (E-Verify, prohibition of use of taxpayer funded services, building of fences, etc.) are all just as vigorously opposed by open borders proponents (immigrations rights activists as they typically call themselves). So this is what we end up with.
Maria, I admire your efforts to promote human rights, but it is the job of the Border Patrol to protect our borders, not to do so is like always leaving your house and car unlocked. If it were your job would you question people who fit a certain “profile” or people who don’t. It is a matter of common sense to do this and yes the other side of that coin is “racial profiling”…not a good thing, but necessary. You may find totally innocent immigrants on a Greyhound bus and you may find ISIS nuts…What do they look like? Where do you even start? What would you do?
Hey John,
If the job is to “protect our borders”, then why are BP agents hassling dark-skinned people a hundred miles away from the border? And targeting people of a certain color or ethnicity is only “common sense” in the mind of an ignorant bigot, since more than half the people in this country illegally are NOT of Mexican origin.
I see little to no “common sense” in your post, but here’s some. People like you, who claim that “racial profiling is necessary” and are so willing to trash other principles and freedoms upon which this country is founded, are eroding the moral fiber and political integrity of our society. Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.
Nope, they did not ask her if she was a legal resident. Why? Because she doesn’t have dark skin. There are a handful of times I have traveled with my “friend” (not sure why that word is put with quotations up there) and she is not an issue. I will travel through the same route with a darker friend of mine, and see if they follow up her “no, I am not a U.S. citizen” with other questions. Hmmm. I’m sure they will smile, ask her where she is from, and then let her go.
She carries her green card at all times, but not once has she had to show it. But racial profiling is OK when it comes to immigration enforcement, so nope, it will never be put on the same sentence with the word “unconstitutional.”
She carries her green card at all times, but not once has she had to show it. But racial profiling is OK when it comes to immigration enforcement, so nope, it will never be put on the same sentence with the word “unconstitutional.”
So, what are you doing about it? Is this policy? Did you report the Border Patrol Officers? Terrorists can come in the color blanco, see Chechnya/Bosnia, and I am curious is you are just pissed off at “Whitey” or actually care about border/national security.
I mean, did your Swedish friend fly in helicopters under attack in Iraq too?
Yellow journalism goes both ways. I am disappointed that you chose to “respond” to my questions/comments in the comment section without addressing them in your article.
I took the time to read your opinion piece, perform some due diligence and be objective please.
maria.taracena I see you “downvoted” my message.
Not cool. Just, not cool.
With that type of journalistic integrity I will now not read you blog/opinion pieces.
I have a long memory and am plan on dying here in Tucson, so I will remember this slight, and continue to read the Range, but will bypass your chum.
I just saw this happen 3 times on the way to Tennessee from New York. The first two happened in Syracuse and Buffalo respectively. Being Memorial Day weekend and all, on the second stop/checkpoint I struck up a conversation with the captain.
So he quoted the case listed above, and we talked about due process.
Now, what he told me is that I don’t have to answer his question. It would violate the 4th and 5th if he took it further if i did not answer. He did state after my non answer (those of us he termed “ugly americans”) he would profile me to determine if I warranted further scrutiny.
I was a little concerned to say the least, when I tested this out in Erie and ignored the agent.
By opening a conversation with an agent, anyone who answers has opened themselves voluntarily to questioning. Because America is a melting pot of ethnicities, one would be hard pressed to discern whether a non-responsive rider was not a citizen or not without the use of racial profiling. As my fellow riders observed, not one caucasian immigrant, (Russian, Scandinavian) where harassed, only those of ethnic minority features.
I am not sure what is told to them about answering honestly and open, but if this holds true and they do not have to respond, it is they who determine their own fates. Perhaps, the ACLU could be alerted and help make a packet for traveling immigrants to help prevent gross violations?
For the record, I believe that people who come here legally should not be harassed like this. A gentleman from Iowa whom I sat next to worked his ass off for his green card. He was harassed a multitude of times which is when I got frustrated. It is the bad apples(illegal immigrants) that have spoiled the system for the bunch(legal Immigrants) and while we opine on the fairness of our immigration laws, those we want to protect originally (legal immigrants) are ultimately being affected by our agendas.