Airport Racial Profiling: A Common Practice?

Airport racial profiling has been a common occurrence since the September 11 attacks, with people of Middle Eastern and Maghrebi descent, as well as Muslims, being targeted. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in the United States has been accused of racial profiling through its Screening Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT) program, which relies on behavioural indicators to identify potential terrorists. From October 2015 to February 2018, the TSA received about 3700 complaints alleging civil rights and civil liberties violations related to passenger screening. While the TSA denies racial profiling, there have been numerous accounts of people from ethnic minorities being singled out and subjected to aggressive questioning and searches.

The ineffectiveness of racial profiling

Since the September 11 attacks, there have been reports of increased racial profiling at airports, particularly targeting people who appear Muslim or of Middle Eastern and Maghrebi descent. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) conducted a security test in 2002 which found that Los Angeles International Airport was the most vulnerable to infiltration in the US when it came to smuggling weapons. However, a 2009 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences asserted that racial profiling is no more effective than random profiling.

Racial profiling has been deemed ineffective and inefficient by several studies and scholars. For instance, studies in the United States have consistently shown that while minorities are targeted more, the chance of finding contraband during searches is the same or lower than that of White people. In some studies, minorities were found to be significantly less likely to have contraband following a search. This indicates that racial profiling does not effectively contribute to fighting crime or enhancing security.

Additionally, racial profiling can negatively impact the relationship between law enforcement and the communities they serve. It erodes trust and creates divisions, particularly with minority communities. This can hinder effective policing, as officers rely on cooperation and collaboration with community members to successfully carry out their duties.

Furthermore, racial profiling is based on the flawed assumption that certain groups are more prone to criminal behaviour. However, this assumption is not supported by empirical evidence, and it is more likely that a member of the majority group will have committed an offence. Racial profiling, therefore, fails to accurately predict behaviour and can result in discriminatory enforcement, spreading resources too thin and missing potential threats.

The Fourth Amendment and racial profiling

The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution provides that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated". This amendment sets a precedent for the protection of individuals' privacy and security, ensuring that law enforcement actions are based on reasonable and articulable suspicion, rather than arbitrary factors such as race or ethnicity.

Despite the Fourth Amendment's protections, racial profiling in airports has been a persistent issue in the United States. Since the September 11, 2001 attacks, there has been an increase in racial profiling at airports, with individuals of Middle Eastern, Muslim, or Maghrebi descent being routinely targeted by law enforcement officials. This practice has raised concerns among civil liberties groups, who argue that racial profiling is ineffective and unconstitutional.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has come under scrutiny for its behavior detection activities, which have been accused of being a cover for racial and religious profiling. A review of complaints received by the TSA revealed indications of potential discrimination and unprofessional conduct involving race. While the TSA has policies prohibiting unlawful profiling, there have been calls for improved oversight to ensure compliance with these policies. The TSA's behavior detection program has been criticized as unscientific and unreliable, with officers in several cities found to have engaged in racial profiling.

To address these concerns, recommendations have been made for the TSA to phase out the behavior detection program and implement rigorous anti-discrimination training for all employees. Additionally, the development of a specific oversight mechanism to monitor behavior detection activities and ensure compliance with policies prohibiting unlawful profiling has been suggested. These measures aim to uphold the Fourth Amendment's guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures and protect individuals from discriminatory practices in airport security screening.

TSA's behaviour detection program

Airport racial profiling in the United States is a government activity directed at suspects because of their race or ethnicity. Since the September 11 attacks, there have been reports of an increase in racial profiling at airports, particularly targeting people of Middle Eastern and Maghrebi descent or who appear to be Muslim.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has policies that prohibit unlawful profiling and has taken steps to reinforce its nondiscrimination and anti-profiling policies. However, the TSA has also been accused of racial profiling in picking out passengers for extra screening. The TSA's behavior detection program has been described as unscientific and unreliable and lacking a "scientific basis". The program identifies suspicious behaviors, such as excessive fidgeting, strong body odor, whistling, and exaggerated emotions, which are used as a pretext for harassing minorities and disfavored groups.

The TSA's behavior detection program is part of its Risk-Based Security (RBS) efforts, which aim to move away from a "one size fits all" approach to security screening. The program, previously reserved for Behavior Detection Officers (BDOs), is now comprised of Transportation Security Officers (TSOs) as well. It trains officers to identify anomalous behaviors by observing passengers and comparing them to an established behavioral baseline. The goal is to identify high-risk travelers and subject them to additional screening. The TSA maintains that its behavior detection program is threat-agnostic and does not become obsolete when adversaries develop new weapons or tactics.

The TSA has completed extensive studies in partnership with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) and the academic community to validate the program. An S&T validation study in 2011, including over 70,000 random samples at 41 airports, found that the TSA's behavior detection program identifies high-risk travelers at a significantly higher rate than random screening. The study concluded that a high-risk traveler is nine times more likely to be identified using behavioral detection.

However, there have been numerous complaints and criticisms of the program. From October 2015 to February 2018, the TSA received about 3,700 complaints alleging civil rights and civil liberties violations related to passenger screening. The TSA's Multicultural Branch reviewed 2,059 of these complaints and found indications of potential discrimination and unprofessional conduct involving race or other factors in about half of them. The GAO has recommended that the TSA develop a specific oversight mechanism to monitor behavior detection activities and ensure compliance with policies prohibiting unlawful profiling.

Discrimination against passengers of colour

One notable example of discrimination against passengers of colour at airports is the case of King Downing, the national coordinator of the American Civil Liberties Union's Campaign Against Airport Racial Profiling. Downing, who is black and wears a short beard, sued the Massachusetts Port Authority and the Massachusetts State Police, alleging that he was a victim of racial profiling at Logan International Airport in Boston. He claimed that the behavioural screening system used at the airport encouraged racial profiling and violated his constitutional rights.

Additionally, there have been numerous complaints alleging civil rights and civil liberties violations related to passenger screening by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). From October 2015 to February 2018, the TSA received about 3,700 such complaints, with indications of potential discrimination and unprofessional conduct involving race or other factors in about half of them. The TSA has been criticised for its behaviour detection program, which has been characterised as unscientific, unreliable, and a cover for racial and religious profiling.

Furthermore, studies have found evidence of discrimination against people of colour in various other contexts. For example, a 2020 study found that black drivers were stopped more often than white drivers, and that minorities were less likely to receive discounts on traffic tickets. Similarly, a 2018 study evaluated the accuracy of facial recognition technologies in identifying individuals of varying skin tones and found that all three commercially available software products performed better on lighter faces than darker faces.

Federal law in the United States prohibits airlines from discriminating against passengers based on race, colour, national origin, religion, sex, or ancestry. However, despite these protections, discrimination against passengers of colour continues to occur, highlighting the need for improved oversight and training to ensure that airport security practices are carried out in a non-discriminatory manner.

The increase in racial profiling post-9/11

Airport racial profiling in the United States is a government activity directed at a suspect or group of suspects because of their race or ethnicity. Since the September 11 attacks in 2001, there has been a notable increase in racial profiling at airports, with people who appear to be Muslim or of Middle Eastern, South Asian, or Arab descent being targeted. This has resulted in an erosion of privacy and individual liberties and a rise in Islamophobic and xenophobic sentiments.

In the weeks and months following 9/11, federal, state, and local law enforcement officials focused their investigations on those responsible for the attacks, which left nearly 3,000 people dead. This led to an increase in security measures at airports, with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) assuming responsibility for airport security. The TSA has been criticized for its behavior detection program, which has been deemed unscientific and unreliable, and there have been numerous complaints of civil rights and civil liberties violations related to passenger screening.

The TSA's behavior detection program identifies behavioral indicators such as gaze aversion, nervous or fidgety gestures, or hand placement over the mouth as signs of potential deceit or bad intentions. However, social science literature has found that these behaviors are not reliable cues for deception. Despite this, TSA officers continue to use these indicators subjectively and arbitrarily, leading to an increase in racial profiling at airports.

The post-9/11 era has also seen an increase in police militarization and mass surveillance, which has disproportionately targeted Muslims and people of Middle Eastern, South Asian, and Arab descent. This has resulted in the criminalization of marginalized and racialized groups, including Muslim, Arab, Latinx, Black, and Indigenous communities. Additionally, protest movements such as Black Lives Matter have also been targeted by increased surveillance and racial profiling practices.

Frequently asked questions