AS the nation commiserate with Texas for the record rainfall and flooding brought about by hurricane Harvey, President Donald Trump announced that he was pardoning former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who was convicted last month of criminal contempt for the way he illegally profiled, hunted down, and jailed undocumented immigrants, particularly Hispanics, in his jurisdiction in Arizona.
Trump’s motive in timing this anticipated announcement was to have “higher ratings,” knowing that people are glued to their TV sets to be updated about the storm and how they can help the people of Texas.
Responding to critics, Trump suggested that the Justice Department had political motives during the Obama administration for charging Arpaio while the former sheriff was only doing his job to combat illegal immigration.
Trump supporters believe the president did the right thing in pardoning Arpaio, reinforcing their hard line stance against immigrants living and working in the United States illegally.
Trump also said his action was no worse than late-term pardons issued under the last two Democratic presidents.
While granting pardon was part of the executive prerogative exercised by previous presidents, Trump granted the pardon before the sentencing of Arpaio. The former Arizona sheriff has not served one day in jail for the criminal offense he was found guilty of, and as his critics pointed out, Trump effectively bypassed the usual practice of the Justice Department review process before granting presidential pardon to Arpaio.
As the New York Times (NYT) reported, Trump asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions and White House counsel Donald F. McGahn II months ago if Arpaio’s case could be dropped. The president was told that it could not be, but that it was well within his presidential authority to pardon Arpaio.
The 85-year-old Arpaio has served for 24 years as sheriff of Maricopa County, and as the NYT reported, has built a reputation throughout the United States “for harsh conditions in his county jail, and for cracking down against undocumented immigrants.”
Arpaio blamed the Obama administration for losing in his reelection bid for a seventh term last year, because of criminal contempt charges that were filed against him on Oct. 26 for persisting with profiling Latinos.
“I thought he was treated unbelievably unfairly,” Trump contended during a press conference in the White House.
“He would have won the election, but they just hammered him just before the election,” Trump argued.
Arpaio backed Trump during the 2016 presidential election.
What is racial profiling and why is it important for us Filipinos in America?
The American Civil Liberties Union defined it this way:
“Racial profiling is a longstanding and deeply troubling national problem despite claims that the United States has entered a “post-racial era.” It occurs every day, in cities and towns across the country, when law enforcement and private security target people of color for humiliating and often frightening detentions, interrogations, and searches without evidence of criminal activity and based on perceived race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion. Racial profiling is patently illegal, violating the U.S. Constitution’s core promises of equal protection under the law to all and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. Just as importantly, racial profiling is ineffective. It alienates communities from law enforcement, hinders community policing efforts, and causes law enforcement to lose credibility and trust among the people they are sworn to protect and serve.
We rely on the police to protect us from harm and promote fairness and justice in our communities. But racial profiling has led countless people to live in fear, casting entire communities as suspects simply because of what they look like, where they come from, or what religion they adhere to.
Racial profiling affects a wide array of communities of color. More than 240 years of slavery and 90 years of legalized racial segregation have led to systemic profiling of blacks in traffic and pedestrian stops. Since September 11, 2001, members of Muslim, Arab, and South Asian communities have been profiled by airline personnel, federal law enforcement, and local police.”
The Constitution of the United States’ 14th Amendment Section 1 stipulates:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
WE FILIPINO who have naturalized, or are living in the country with all legal papers are protected by this law
While Arpaio, Trump and his supporters may argue this tactic of racial profiling may help solve the problem of illegal immigration, those who are in the country legally may be denied of their civil rights just because they look and sound ”different” from “typical” Americans. Being persons of color, we, too, may be subject to racial profiling if the Arpaio-Trump “doctrine” is to be normalized and followed, no matter who you voted for in the last election.
* * *
Gel Santos Relos is the anchor of TFC’s “Balitang America.” Views and opinions expressed by the author in this column are solely those of the author and not of Asian Journal and ABS-CBN-TFC. For comments, go to www.TheFil-AmPerspective.com, https://www.facebook.com/Gel.Santos.Relos
