ETHNIC PROFILING RULED INVALID

LOS ANGELES - In a potentially far-reaching decision contradicting a
25-year-old Supreme Court opinion, a federal appeals court has ruled
that in most circumstances, law-enforcement officials cannot rely on
ethnic appearance as a factor in deciding whether to stop someone
suspected of a crime.

In a strongly worded decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
declared Tuesday that because of the growth in the Hispanic population
in the region, ethnicity was an irrelevant criterion for law officers
to stop a person, without other specific information identifying the
suspect.

The case involved three Mexicans who were stopped about 115 miles east
of San Diego, by U.S. Border Patrol officers acting on a tip in 1996.
The three were found to have marijuana, a handgun and ammunition. They
were convicted of various drug and weapons charges, and have been deported.

The Border Patrol had cited five factors in the decision to stop the
three, including a U-turn just before reaching an immigration checkpoint.

In their appeal, the men argued that when the officers relied on their
ethnic appearance, they violated their Fourth Amendment protections
against unreasonable search and seizure.

In a 7-4 vote, the court up-held an earlier decision that the Border
Patrol was justified in making the stop.

The opinion contradicted a Supreme Court ruling that said it was
generally justifiable to use racial appearance as one such factor. The
appeals-court majority said it was diverging from that earlier opinion
because the huge increases in the Hispanic population in the border
region required a change in the way the law was applied.

But the judges added, "We conclude that, at this point in our nation's
history, and given the continuing changes in our ethnic and racial
composition, Hispanic appearance is, in general, of such little
probative value that it may not be considered as a relevant factor
where particularized or individualized suspicion is required."