Methodological Issues in Biased Policing Research with Applications to the Washington State Patrol

Racial profiling violates the United States Constitution’s premise that all people are equal under the law, as well as the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee that people should be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. Racial profiling has been found to result from individual officer racism or stereotyping, from institutionalized biases, and from the organizational culture of law enforcement agencies. We begin this Article by discussing the history of racial profiling before proceeding to consider various studies from a select number of American jurisdictions. We then examine important methodological and theoretical issues in conducting research on racial profiling and racially biased policing, including a detailed discussion of our research with the Washington State Patrol (WSP). These issues are important to consider because if studies of racial profiling are not based on sound scientific principles, then those who deny the existence of the problem can attribute revelations of bias to faulty research methodology. The Article concludes with a response to the critiques of our methodology and conclusions presented by Professors Mario Barnes and Robert Chang

Methodological Issues in Biased Policing Research with Applications to the Washington State Patrol

Racial profiling violates the United States Constitution’s premise that all people are equal under the law, as well as the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee that people should be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. Racial profiling has been found to result from individual officer racism or stereotyping, from institutionalized biases, and from the organizational culture of law enforcement agencies. We begin this Article by discussing the history of racial profiling before proceeding to consider various studies from a select number of American jurisdictions. We then examine important methodological and theoretical issues in conducting research on racial profiling and racially biased policing, including a detailed discussion of our research with the Washington State Patrol (WSP). These issues are important to consider because if studies of racial profiling are not based on sound scientific principles, then those who deny the existence of the problem can attribute revelations of bias to faulty research methodology. The Article concludes with a response to the critiques of our methodology and conclusions presented by Professors Mario Barnes and Robert Chang

Medical Marijuana Policy and the Virtues of Federalism

We analyze the policy issue of medical marijuana to illustrate how key virtues of federalism can be used to make a threshold determination as to whether a particular public policy should be subject to federal regulation or reserved for states. When the substantive merits of the policy issue are currently debated and unresolved, and that issue area has traditionally been regulated by states, we employ a three-prong test for determining as a threshold matter whether the federal government should assert preemptive jurisdiction over the policy. That test has is roots in well-established theories of federalism that comprise what we refer to as the “classic virtues of federalism.” Based on our analysis, medical marijuana is a policy that should be left to the states. Copyright 2008, Oxford University Press.

The State of American Federalism 2010--2011: The Economy, Healthcare Reform and Midterm Elections Shape the Intergovernmental Agenda

The slow and jobless economic recovery, the midterm elections and the passage of healthcare reform legislation dominated the political landscape in 2010. The growing momentum behind federal deficit reduction and budget cuts provided a stark juxtaposition to the previously active federal role in stimulating the economy. Consequently, state and local budgets face significant belt-tightening. The cross-cutting impacts of these and other significant federal and state policy changes are expected to affect future cost sharing in government programs, place a higher burden on state and local governments over the long term and influence the balance of intergovernmental relations. Many of the important developments in politics, policy, and law during 2010--2011 are more notable for their potential future impact as opposed to immediate impact on American federalism. Copyright 2011, Oxford University Press.