Racial Profiling and Police Brutality

When Race Becomes the Excuse for Violence

For far too many people, encounters with law enforcement are shaped not by behavior, but by skin color. A walk to the store turns into questioning. A traffic stop turns aggressive. What begins as suspicion based on race often escalates into force. This isn’t just bad policing, it’s brutality with a bias baked in.

Our civil rights attorneys often hear from New Yorkers who describe the same pattern: stopped without cause, searched without reason, and treated as dangerous without evidence. The emotional toll of racial profiling is immense, and when it leads to violence, the damage is both physical and deeply personal.

Racially motivated brutality isn’t random. It’s part of a cycle that punishes people of color disproportionately. Breaking that cycle requires using the courts, where federal and state protections give victims a path to justice.

How Racial Bias Fuels Police Brutality in New York

Bias doesn’t always announce itself with slurs or explicit comments. More often, it shows up in how officers interpret ordinary actions. A Black teenager reaching into his pocket is seen as a threat. A Latino driver asking questions during a traffic stop is treated as defiant. These assumptions fuel unnecessary escalation.

In New York, racial bias has been linked to excessive force cases through both data and testimony. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits unreasonable seizures, and victims may bring claims under 42 U.S.C. §1983 when force crosses that line. At the state level, New York Civil Rights Law specifically provides remedies for discriminatory law enforcement practices, making it possible to challenge brutality tied to bias.

Our civil rights attorneys explain that courts measure “reasonableness” in context. When evidence shows race drove an officer’s choices, the very foundation of that defense crumbles. What may be argued as “reasonable” in a vacuum often becomes indefensible once bias is factored in.

Data Showing Racial Disparities in Police Use of Force

Statistics don’t tell individual stories, but they reveal undeniable trends. Across New York City and the state at large, data consistently shows that Black and Latino residents are more likely to be stopped, searched, and subjected to force. Those numbers reflect what many communities have said for decades: profiling drives brutality.

• Stop-and-frisk history. Federal courts ruled in Floyd v. City of New York that the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk program violated both the Fourth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. That ruling forced sweeping reforms.
• Arrest data. Studies show that people of color are arrested and subjected to force at higher rates than white individuals for identical alleged conduct. Under New York Executive Law §296 (part of the Human Rights Law), such disparities can support claims of discriminatory policing practices.
• Complaint records. Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) data demonstrates that complaints of excessive force are filed disproportionately by people of color, showing the lived experience matches the numbers.

Data on its own doesn’t win a case, but when paired with law, it strengthens claims. Judges and juries are less willing to dismiss an incident as “isolated” when both the numbers and the protections built into law point to systemic profiling.

Evidence That Proves Profiling Was Involved

Racial profiling can feel difficult to prove, but courts recognize both direct and circumstantial evidence. Victims don’t need a confession of bias; they need facts that point to unfair treatment.

Evidence may include the officer’s language during the encounter, discrepancies between arrest reports and bodycam footage, or comparisons to how similarly situated white individuals were treated. In federal court, claims often proceed under 42 U.S.C. §1983, while at the state level, New York Civil Rights Law makes clear that citizens may not be deprived of equal protection based on race.

Our civil rights attorneys often help clients gather:

• Witness testimony. Statements from others at the scene can show whether an officer treated one person differently because of race.
• Departmental records. Prior complaints against the same officer or unit can demonstrate bias over time.
• Video footage. Bodycams, surveillance cameras, or bystander recordings often expose unequal treatment in real time.

When put together, this evidence transforms suspicion into proof. It shows that what happened wasn’t chance, but the product of profiling.

Maine Lacks Strong Racial Profiling Statutes Compared To New York’s Protections

Not every state builds protections against racial profiling into its statutes. Maine, for example, has no comprehensive law directly banning racial profiling by police. That absence makes it harder for victims there to ground their claims in state law.

By contrast, New York offers a stronger framework. The New York State Human Rights Law (Executive Law §291 and §296) prohibits discrimination by public officials, and Civil Rights Law §79-n provides a specific civil cause of action when victims are targeted based on race. Combined with Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claims, this structure makes New York one of the stronger jurisdictions for victims seeking accountability.

For New Yorkers, this means legal remedies don’t stop with federal law, state courts can and do play a significant role in addressing racially motivated brutality.

Linking Racial Profiling to Civil Rights Claims

For a brutality case involving racial bias, the strongest approach often layers multiple claims. Plaintiffs may allege excessive force under the Fourth Amendment, but also discriminatory intent under the Fourteenth Amendment. Adding state law claims, such as those under New York Civil Rights Law §40-c (which prohibits discrimination by public officials), gives the case even more depth.

This combined strategy reflects the full scope of the harm. Brutality isn’t just about the physical act, it’s about the motive behind it. When that motive is race, equal protection arguments and state-level discrimination statutes become crucial.

Our civil rights attorneys often frame these lawsuits to capture that broader picture. The courts respond differently when the case shows not only unreasonable force but also the discriminatory foundation beneath it.

Holding Departments Accountable for Bias-Based Abuse

Profiling often reflects more than one officer’s bad choice. It’s systemic. Departments that fail to train or discipline officers create environments where bias thrives. That’s why lawsuits don’t just name officers individually, they also target municipalities. Under Monell v. Department of Social Services, victims can sue departments under 42 U.S.C. §1983 when policies or patterns enable discrimination.

New York provides complementary state remedies. Under Civil Rights Law §79-n, victims may hold both the officer and the department responsible for discriminatory actions. In some cases, Executive Law §296 has been used to argue systemic bias that mirrors unlawful workplace discrimination, applying the principle that public officials cannot operate with racial prejudice.

For victims, this upward accountability is vital. It acknowledges that misconduct isn’t just about one encounter, it’s about patterns. Holding departments to account pushes change beyond the individual level, ensuring systemic reform.

Horn Wright, LLP, Stands With Victims of Racially Motivated Brutality

Racial profiling leading to brutality isn’t just a personal injustice, it’s a betrayal of constitutional promises. At Horn Wright, LLP, our civil rights attorneys stand with those targeted because of race, helping them pursue damages, reforms, and accountability. We investigate, uncover evidence of bias, and push for systemic changes when departments fail. If you’ve been a victim of racially motivated brutality, we’ll help you work with one of the nation’s leading civil rights law firms to demand justice.