PROBLEMS WITH DOG SNIFFS

An excellent expose by the Tribune shows that alerts by police
drug-sniffing dogs in suburban Illinois are usually wrong, and that
the hit rates for car searches resulting from the use of dogs are
nearly twice as high for whites than for Hispanics ("Drug dogs often
wrong; Police canines can fall short, but observers cite residue and
poor training as factors," Page 1, Jan. 6).

These numbers do not tell the full story. Dog sniffs are menacing,
especially for minority motorists, in light of historical abuses
committed with police dogs. Dog sniffs also are humiliating, taking
place in full view of passing motorists, friends and strangers alike,
many of whom probably conclude that the people subjected to dog
sniffs must be guilty of something. Full car searches based on false
dog alerts are even more frightening and embarrassing.

The same state database used by the Tribune shows a similar racial
disparity in so-called consent searches, which occur when police lack
legal cause to search a car but nonetheless request permission to
search. In 2009, Illinois State Police troopers were 3.2 times more
likely to consent search Hispanic motorists compared to white
motorists, yet the resulting hit rate for whites was 2.7 times higher
than for Hispanics. The data are similar for other years and departments.

These data demonstrate the need to reform dog sniffs and consent
searches during routine traffic stops. Dog sniffs should be banned
absent individualized reasonable suspicion that a car contains illegal drugs.

In 2005, legislation to mandate this standard was sponsored by almost
all members of the Illinois House Black Caucus. This standard should
be constitutionally mandated. Without this objective standard, too
many police officers use hunches to decide which cars to sniff, and
those hunches too often rest on unconscious or even conscious bias.
The inevitable result of this unbridled discretion is the stark
racial disparity found by the Tribune.

Requests for consent, like canine sniffs, are based on hunches
instead of objective evidence, leading predictably to racial
disparity. Roadside search requests are inherently coercive, which is
why more than 95 percent of motorists of all races give so-called
consent to Illinois State Police troopers. Thus, individualized
suspicion is not a meaningful fix, and consent searches of cars
should be banned.

The state's dog-sniff and consent-search data also show the need for
other reforms.

First, a state statute calls for a task force to study such data, and
to recommend improvements in police policies. Unfortunately, this
task force has never met. The governor immediately should convene it.

In turn, the task force should promptly recommend individualized
suspicion for canine sniffs and a ban on consent searches.

Second, the Tribune could not have performed its study without data
collected under the Illinois Traffic Stop Statistical Study Act of
2003, a police accountability law championed by then-State Sen.
Barack Obama. Unfortunately, that statute will expire in 2015. The
Legislature now should make this critical statute permanent.

Third, the Legislature should create a statewide system for training,
certifying and monitoring drug-sniffing police dogs.

A regulatory agency should track the hit rates of car searches based
on each dog's alerts.

The study act should be amended to ensure that the public has access
to these data.

Dogs with poor hit rates or racially disparate hit rates should be
retrained or retired.

- - Harvey Grossman, legal director, ACLU of Illinois, Chicago