The Northwest Constitutional Rights Center (NWCRC) has written to the Portland Tribune criticizing its pro-police reporting of a recent 9th Circuit Court decision.

On Friday, the Tribune reported on a decision by the 9th Circuit court to overrule the conviction of an African American male because he was stopped without reasonable suspicion—the court added that “recent relations between police and the African American community in Portland are also pertinent to our analysis.” The Tribune story’s headline was: “Ruling Puts Cop Searches In Peril.”

And judging from some of the comments on the Tribune story, the paper has its readership pretty well figured out:

The 9th Circus strikes again.

Terrible ruling. When is the madness going to stop?

More social engineering by the 9th Circus Court of Appeals. Now if someone is African American, they are going to be considered to scared and dumb to consent to a search?

Hmmm—More special rights for minorities. Sorry, but special rights are not equal rights.

What a joke. So this convicted felon criminal was possessing a handgun and drug paraphanelia and that is ok because he is black? Wow, what a way to throw good police work out the window. What does that tell the cops about doing their job? That tells them that they shouldn’t do their job and just drive around and simply respond to calls and not contact anybody if they can help it, and god forbid the police have any contact with a black citizen because there is some tension there between the black community and the Portland Police due to past incidents.

Alejandro Queral of the NWCRC responds with this letter to the Tribune’s editors:

To the Editor:

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision to throw out the conviction of Bennie Washington [Ruling puts cop searches in peril, Nick Budnick, July 6, A1] does not put “cop searches in peril” nor does it carve out a new Fourth Amendment search and seizure doctrine. The decision does highlight the racial tension between the police and the community and should make us consider why and how Portland police officers decide to stop and question African Americans like Mr. Washington, even when officers have no reasonable suspicion that a crime is afoot.

The 9th Circuit determined that the weapon found in Mr. Washington’s car was the “fruit of the poisonous tree,” a well established legal doctrine that excludes any evidence that is found as a result of an unconstitutional action. In this case, the poisonous tree was Mr. Washington’s illegal detention and search (the officers had no reasonable suspicion or probable cause to approach and question Mr. Washington who, like any other reasonable person under the circumstances, did not feel free to leave the scene.)

But after all is said and done, one question remains unanswered: if the two officers did not even have reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was taking place, why are they asking an African American man for consent to search his car and his person? If there is no reasonable suspicion we must consider the possibility that the police contact was initiated simply because of Mr. Washigton’s race. Statistics released by the Police Bureau over the last three years reveal that racial profiling is taking place in the streets of Portland: African American are stopped and searched more often than Whites, even though the latter are more likely to have illegal drugs and weapons more often than African Americans. The Northwest Constitutional Rights Center is working with other community groups and leaders to ensure that the Police Bureau ends this practice that is so damaging to community-police relationships. As long as Portland police officers continue to target and treat African Americans and other people of color differently, the community has an obligation to scrutinize the actions by police officers and policy decisions made by the Bureau that may affect people of color in disparate ways.

Alejandro Queral

I wonder whether the Tribune‘ll print it.