Thursday, August 06, 2009

Racial Profiling Definition - ACLU



Racial Profiling: Definition

"Racial Profiling" refers to the discriminatory practice by law enforcement officials of targeting individuals for suspicion of crime based on the individual's race, ethnicity, religion or national origin. Criminal profiling, generally, as practiced by police, is the reliance on a group of characteristics they believe to be associated with crime. Examples of racial profiling are the use of race to determine which drivers to stop for minor traffic violations (commonly referred to as "driving while black or brown"), or the use of race to determine which pedestrians to search for illegal contraband.

Another example of racial profiling is the targeting, ongoing since the September 11th attacks, of Arabs, Muslims and South Asians for detention on minor immigrant violations in the absence of any connection to the attacks on the World Trade Center or the Pentagon.

Law enforcement agent includes a person acting in a policing capacity for public or private purposes. This includes security guards at department stores, airport security agents, police officers, or, more recently, airline pilots who have ordered passengers to disembark from flights, because the passengers' ethnicity aroused the pilots' suspicions. Members of each of these occupations have been accused of racial profiling.

Racial profiling does not refer to the act of a law enforcement agent pursuing a suspect in which the specific description of the suspect includes race or ethnicity in combination with other identifying factors.

Defining racial profiling as relying “solely” on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin or religion can be problematic. This definition found in some state racial profiling laws is unacceptable, because it fails to include when police act on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin or religion in combination with an alleged violation of all law. Under the “solely” definition, an officer who targeted Latino drivers who were speeding would not be racial profiling because the drivers were not stopped “solely” because of their race but also because they were speeding. This would eliminate the vast majority of racial profiling now occurring.

Any definition of racial profiling must include, in addition to racially or ethnically discriminatory acts, discriminatory omissions on the part of law enforcement as well. For example, during the eras of lynching in the South in the 19th and early 20th centuries and the civil rights movement in the 1950's and 1960's, southern sheriffs sat idly by while racists like the Ku Klux Klan terrorized African Americans. At times, the sheriffs would even release black suspects to the lynch mobs. A recent example would be the complaint by an African American man in Maryland, who after moving into a white community, was attacked and subjected to property damage. Local police failed to respond to his repeated complaints until they arrested him for shooting his gun into the air, trying to disperse a hostile mob outside his home.

Racial Profiling May Be Hazardous To Your Health

Many racial profiling victims walk away with traffic tickets, but too often for others the outcome of racial profiling is death.

Pennsylvania (Brentwood) - On October 12, 1995, Jonny Gammage, a 31 year-old African American male, was killed after being pulled over while driving the Jaguar of his cousin, Pittsburgh Steelers football player Ray Seals, in a predominately white community. Although police claimed that Gammage initiated the struggle, a tow truck driver said he saw one officer start the fight and the others join in kicking, hitting and clubbing Gammage while he lay on the pavement. Three officers were tried for involuntary manslaughter: John Vojtas was acquitted; Lt. Milton Mulholland and Michael Albert had their charges dismissed after two mistrials. Gammage's family settled a wrongful death civil rights lawsuit against the five officers involved and their police departments for $1.5 million.

New York (Bronx-New York City) - On February 4, 1999, Amadou Diallo, an unarmed 22 year-old immigrant from New Guinea, West Africa, was shot and killed in the narrow vestibule of the apartment building where he lived. Four white officers, Sean Carroll, Kenneth Boss, Edward McMellon and Richard Murphy fired 41 bullets, hitting Diallo 19 times. All four were members of the New York City Police Department's Street Crimes Unit, which, under the slogan, "We Own the Night," used aggressive "stop and frisk" tactics against African Americans at a rate double that group's population percentage. A report on the unit by the state attorney general found that blacks were stopped at a rate 10 times that of whites, and that 35 percent of those stops lacked reasonable suspicion to detain or had reports insufficiently filled out to make a determination. Thousands attended Diallo's funeral. Demonstrations were held almost daily, along with the arrests of over 1,200 people in planned civil disobedience. In a trial that was moved out of the community where Diallo lived and to Albany in upstate New York, the four officers who killed Diallo were acquitted of all charges.

Ohio (Cincinnati) - On April 7, 2001, in the early morning hours, Timothy Thomas, a 19 year-old African-American, was shot to death by police officer John Roach. Thomas had 14 outstanding misdemeanor warrants, mostly traffic violations, including failure to wear a seat belt. According to a city councilman, he was running away, holding up his baggy pants, and scaled a fence, landing in a driveway where Roach was approaching and shot Thomas. He became the fifth black male in the city to die at the hands of police in a five-month period and the fifteenth since 1995. Two nights of protests left broken windows at City Hall and fires around the city. Witnesses reported that following Thomas' funeral, six city SWAT team officers shot pellet-filled bags into a peaceful crowd. Two people hit by the pellets filed lawsuits. Under community and city council pressure, both the public safety director and city manager resigned. Officer Roach was indicted on charges of negligent homicide, and obstructing official business, resulting from differences in his version of events.

Roach was acquitted in a bench trial characterized by the judge's (a former prosecutor) open admiration for Roach, and blaming Timothy Thomas for “making” Roach kill him.

A community coalition, the Cincinnati Black United Front and the ACLU of Ohio filed suit against the city and the Fraternal Order of Police, citing a pattern and practice of discrimination by police, including issuing the type of traffic citations Thomas received to African Americans at twice their population percentage. In April 2002 the case was settled, under terms including the establishment of a civilian complaint review board and the activation of the reporting of collected traffic stop data that had been enacted by city ordinance in 2001. The Department of Justice also intervened and settled with the city, including revision and review of use of force policy.

It is significant to note that research confirms the existence of bias in decisions to shoot. A series of University of California/University of Chicago studies recreated the experience of a police officer confronted with a potentially dangerous suspect, and found that:

  • participants fired on an armed target more quickly when the target was African American than when White, and decided not to shoot an unarmed target more quickly when the target was White than when African American;
  • participants failed to shoot an armed target more often when that target was White than when the target was African American. If the target was unarmed, participants mistakenly shot the target more often when African American than when White;
  • shooting bias was greater among participants who held a strong cultural stereotype of African Americans as aggressive, violent and dangerous, and among participants who reported more contact with African Americans. shooting bias was greater among participants who held a strong cultural stereotype of African Americans as aggressive, violent and dangerous, and among participants who reported more contact with African Americans1.

The stories above and hundreds of others present a compelling argument that not only does racial profiling exists, but it is widespread, and has had a destructive effect on the lives of communities of color, and attitudes toward police.

Asian Racial Profiling

Asians, who, according to the U.S. census, number 10 million, or 4 percent of the population, have been victims of racial profiling as well. Wen Ho Lee, a Taiwanese American was targeted and suspected of espionage on the basis of his race. Memos by high-ranking FBI and Department of Energy officials acknowledged that Lee was singled out because he was Chinese, and eight similarly situated non-Chinese were not prosecuted.2

In Seattle, Washington in July 2001 a group of 14 Asian American youth were stopped by police for jaywalking, claiming that they were kept against the wall for about an hour. The Seattle Times reported that one officer told them he had visited their country while in the army, and asked them repeatedly whether they spoke English. The paper also reported that U.S. Representative David Wu (D-Oregon) was detained entering the headquarters of the Department of Energy, and repeatedly.

In 2001, the Asian Freedom Project of Wisconsin issued a report that found the racial profiling of Hmong communities there, and included the testimony of adults, as well as boys and girls.

The Garden Grove (CA) Police Department settled a “gang” database racial profiling lawsuit by a group of young Asian Americans who said their civil rights were violated when officers photographed them as suspected gang members based merely on their ethnicity and clothing.

Indian Racial Profiling

Indigenous people ( Native Americans) call it “DWI,” with a new twist: “Driving While Indian.” According to the National American Indian Housing Council, there are 2.4 million Indians (including Eskimos and Aleuts) in the U.S. Indians complain about stops and searches by local police and sheriffs on roads leading to and from reservations.

In South Dakota, widespread reports of racial profiling led to hearings before the state legislature, where Indians testified about their being stopped and searched not only based on race but also on religious articles hanging from rearview mirrors, and regional license plates that identified them as living on reservations.

In June 2002 scores of Indians in the state's Bennett County complained to Department of Justice attorneys, alleging racial profiling at the hands of sheriffs there, including vehicular stops in the absence of reasonable suspicion, the administration of breathalyzer tests without reasonable suspicion, warrantless searches of homes and vehicles, and demanding to see drivers licenses and vehicle registrations while inside bars.

Walking While Black and Brown

Although "Driving While Black/Brown" traffic stops and searches are the form of racial profiling that has received the most media attention, profiling takes place off the roadways as well. Black and Latino pedestrians are regularly stopped and frisked without reasonable cause.

In New York City, the December 1999 report of the New York City Police Departments pedestrian "stop and frisk" practices by the state attorney general provided glaring evidence of racial profiling in the nation's largest city. Blacks comprise 25.6 percent of the City's population, yet 50.6 percent of all persons "stopped" during the period were black. Hispanics comprise 23.7 percent of the City's population yet, 33.0 percent of all "stops" were of Hispanics. By contrast, whites are 43.4 percent of the City's population, but accounted for only 12.9 percent of all stops. Blacks comprise 62.7 percent of all persons "stopped" by the NYPD's Street Crime Unit ("SCU").

In precincts in which blacks and Hispanics each represented less than 10 percent of the total population, individuals identified as belonging to these racial groups nevertheless accounted for more than half of the total "stops" during the covered period. Blacks accounted for 30 percent of all persons "stopped" in these precincts; Hispanics accounted for 23.4 percent of all persons "stopped."

Finally, precincts where minorities constitute the majority of the overall population tended to see more "stop & frisk" activity than precincts where whites constitute a majority of the population: Of the ten precincts showing the highest rate of "stop and frisk" activity (measured by "stops" per 1,000 residents), in only one (the 10 th Precinct) was the majority of the population white. In seven other precincts, blacks and Hispanics constituted the majority of the population. The remaining two precincts were business districts in Manhattan and Brooklyn in which the daytime racial breakdown of persons within the precinct is unknown.

In roughly half of the police precincts in New York City, the majority of the population living in the precinct is white. However, of these 36 majority-white precincts, only 13 were in the top half of precincts showing most "stops" during the period.

"Gang" Database Racial Profiling

In Orange County California, a database containing the names and photographs of reputed gang members appeared to racially profile.3 Latinos, Asians and African Americans were more than 90 percent of the 20,221 men and women in the Gang Reporting Evaluation and Tracking system, but made up less than half of Orange County's population. The disparity attracted the notice of the California Advisory Committee of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights as well as the ACLU. We asked the county district attorney's office to establish a civilian oversight board to monitor what we saw as problems with the list.

"Bicycling While Black and Brown"

Youth of color have been victims of racially-motivated bicycling stops, " In April, 2001, the ACLU joined a suit against Eastpointe, Michigan , representing 21 young African-American men who were stopped by the police while riding their bikes there. The ACLU argued that the bicyclists were stopped in this predominantly white suburb of Detroit because of their race and not because they were doing anything wrong. In a 1996 memorandum to the Eastpointe City Manager, the former police chief stated that he instructed his officers to investigate any black youths riding through Eastpointe subdivisions. Police searched many of young men and, in some cases, seized and later sold their bicycles. Police logs and reports in Eastpointe have identified over 100 incidents between 1995 and 1998 in which African-American youth were detained.

"Bitten While Black and Brown"

A throwback to the grainy ‘60's black and white television news footage of vicious police dogs attacking peaceful black civil rights protesters is the continued discriminatory use of canine units by police. These dogs, lethal weapons capable of biting at 2000 pounds pressure per square inch, and their handlers have been implicated in a vicious form of racial profiling that has led to legal action:

California (Los Angeles)- The ACLU of Southern California compiled reports on the hundreds of mostly blacks and Latinos who were bitten by Los Angeles Police Department dogs from 1990-1992, charging that the dogs trained to "attack and maul," were routinely sent out in non-violent situations. In 1997, California state highway patrol canine units stopped almost 34,000 vehicles. Only 2 percent were carrying drugs.

Maryland (Prince Georges County) - The Washington Post reported that in May 2001 federal prosecutors charged a county police officer with releasing her police dog on an unarmed Mexican immigrant as part of a pattern of using and threatening the use of the dog on people of color. Despite being the subject of four lawsuits, twice being guilty of making false statements to a supervisor, and five prior instances of releasing the dog on suspects who weren't resisting, and being flagged by a departmental "early warning" system, the officer remained undisciplined in any substantive way. In 1999 the Post reported that thirteen police dog excessive force suits had been filed in Prince Georges circuit and federal courts, in addition to five others that ended in judgement for plaintiffs or settlement. Of the total, ten alleged repeated bites of suspects once under police control, or while cuffed or on the ground.

South Dakota (Wagner)- While not involving the use of physical canine force, the issue reached a new low when school officials and police led a large German shepherd drug dog through classrooms in suspicionless drug searches of Yankton Sioux K-12 students, some as young as six years old. In July 2002, the ACLU filed suit in federal court.

Washington (Seattle) -In 1992 the ACLU alleged that police dog handlers used excessive force on suspects. Dogs were trained to attack and bite suspects regardless of their actions, even against alleged shoplifters, gasoline siphoners and jaywalkers. They also reported that in that year, 40 percent of police dog attacks were against African Americans, and that 91 people had received police dog bite injuries requiring hospitalization.

The following states appear to require independent reasonable suspicion for dog searches: Alaska,4 Illinois,5 Minnesota,6 New Hampshire, New York,8 Pennsylvania,9 and Washington.10

"Shopping While Black and Brown"

The targeting of shoppers/business patrons of color for suspicion of shoplifting by private security and other employees has disproportionately affected both working and prominent African-American women. TV talk show host Oprah Winfrey said she was refused buzz-in entry to a store even after seeing white women admitted and making a second attempt. After calling from a pay phone and being assured the store was in fact open, a third try failed as well (New York City) . U.S, Congresswoman Maxine Waters said she was followed around a store and required to show her key at a hotel, unlike whites who entered before her ( New York City) . Professional basketball player and Olympic medalist Sheryl Swoopes was kept waiting to be seated for almost an hour at a restaurant, while whites who arrived after her were seated before her (Houston, Texas).

Pauline Hampton and her niece, both African-Americans, were shopping at the Dillard Department Store in Overland Park, Kansas , a suburb of Kansas City, with their children. After making several purchases, they went to the cosmetics counter to redeem a coupon. A white security guard accused Hampton of shoplifting, took her shopping bag, and, without consent, searched it, emptying the bag onto the counter. After finding the receipt for the items, he shoved the goods and the empty bag back to her. When she complained about his actions, the guard ordered them to leave, and threatened to call the police and have them forcibly removed. Hampton eventually called her husband to the scene and the situation escalated. They sued, and were awarded a $1.2 million judgement; the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Dillard's appeal.

The store chain, based in Arkansas has also faced dozens of racial profiling lawsuits, claiming harassment and false arrest, in other states including Arkansas, Iowa, and Texas. Evidence produced in one case showed that although 16 percent of its shoppers were African American, 87 percent of the false arrest claims were made by them. In Texas, Dillard settled and paid money to the family of an African American customer who died at a store after being beaten and hog-tied while being detained, and has also settled discrimination suits by employees in Kansas and Missouri.

Other companies sued for racial profiling include Eddie Bauer, Avis Rent A Car, Denny's Restaurant, The Children's Place, and Holiday Spa.

Worksite Racial Profiling

The Immigration and Naturalization Service has had a history of disproportionately targeting ethnic groups of color for undocumented labor violations. Like all law enforcement, INS agents must have sufficient evidence of wrong doing to establish probable cause or reasonable suspicion to arrest or detain. They may not carry out their duties in a racially or ethnically discriminatory manner. While ethnicity or nationality are obviously critical elements in immigration violations by themselves, without additional facts there is insufficient basis for law enforcement action.

The New York Times reviewed files of INS raids released as part of the settlement of a garment workers union selective enforcement suit against the agency in New York City. The settlement included a summary that Latinos were 96 percent of the 2,907 people arrested in the 187 worksite raids carried out by the INS in the district, fat greater than their representation in the city's legal or illegal population. This occurred even where the INS acknowledged that half the workers were not Latino but Asian, including undocumented immigrants.

And while some raids were based on informant information, 80 percent were initiated by agents who cited as primary evidence subjects' appearance or language without evidence of wrongdoing. Included were skin color, speaking Spanish or English with a Spanish accent, appearing to be of South or Central American descent and wearing clothing “not typical of North Americans.” Such characterizations in major American cities are common to born and naturalized citizens alike.

Undocumented workers were discovered and arrested in all but a few of the reviewed raids, but nearly everyone arrested was Latino.

Suits have also been filed in Arkansas, California, Louisiana, and Ohio claiming racial profiling by the INS. A federal court in Ohio found violations of the rights of Latinos by that states highway patrol's practice of stopping Latino drivers to question them about their immigration status, including officers even confiscated the green cards of legal migrant workers claiming they were counterfeit. In California, federal courts have found Fourth Amendment violations of Latinos in the stopping of Latinos on the basis of appearance and foreign sounding names.

The Supreme Court has held that INS agents working near the Mexican border may use Spanish ethnicity as a basis for detaining a person, but that it may not be the only basis.

A related issue is the targeting by police, first reported by the ACLU in Florida, of Latinos waiting on public sidewalks for labor employers to appear and select them for work, under the offense of being "visual clutter."

"Voting While Black and Brown"

In Florida, the 2000 presidential election was rampant with claims of racial profiling. The presumption that African-Americans tended to vote Democratic provided the Republican-controlled election apparatus with an easily identified target. The state changed the election's outcome by targeting people of color in a manner reminiscent of the racist poll taxes and literacy requirements of earlier Southern history, or by carrying out facially race-neutral policies that would have a foreseeable disparate impact.

In the months before the election, Florida's secretary of state compiled an “ex-felon scrub list” of names for removal from the voter rolls. It contained thousands of inexact matches as well as names of state residents with convictions in other states that turned out not to be felonies. These actions were destined to have a disparate impact on people of color because of their higher rate of incarceration. And, in an action with similar impact, Florida residents with felony convictions in other states were removed from the rolls, even though courts had previously ordered the reinstating of voting rights to all who would have been eligible to vote in the state of their conviction.

On election day, poll workers in communities of color, following elected officials' instructions to strictly challenge voter eligibility, required photo identification of African Americans while asking for none of whites, and required two forms of identification from Latinos where the law called for only one. Untold numbers, estimated to be in the thousands, were not given affidavit ballots that would preserve their votes pending resolution of any qualification issues. Even the state NAACP president was denied one until she stated her willingness to be jailed over the issue.

Most serious were the hundreds of reports, in African-American communities, of state police harassment of voters at polling places and traffic checkpoints, where they lined up cars, checking driving papers and inspecting vehicles. Racial profiling at its worst, this tactic appeared to be designed to delay and intimidate voters of color.

As to the ballot controversy, African-Americans were 11 percent of the eligible voters, but 54 percent of the rejected ballots; four times more likely to have ballots rejected as white voters; more likely to be voting by punch card, which had three times higher error rates than optical-scan systems; and received almost none of the laptop computers sent to precincts for county voter registration record access.

"Flying While Black and Brown"

Airline passengers of color have long complained of racial profiling. Customs officials at international airports were found to have systematically targeted members of certain racial and ethnic groups, particularly black women, for intrusive and degrading personal searches, based on the false assumption that they were more likely to be transporting drugs.

In March 2000 the General Accounting Office issued a report of customs searches of 102,000 airline passengers in fiscal years 1997 and 1998. It found that black women were 9 times more likely than white women to be x-rayed after a frisk or pat-down search, but less than half as likely to be found carrying contraband. During those years, The Washington Post reported, 90 black women sued Customs after being searched at O'Hare Airport in Chicago, and one Hispanic woman, Amanda Buritica sued after being stopped, handcuffed, placed in a hospital and forced to ingest powerful laxatives. When she was released 25 hours later, no drugs had been found.

A new commissioner, Ray Kelly was brought in and pledged to end the practice. Although he eliminated the vague and often contradictory criteria that the agency used to decide who to stop, and although he reduced the total searches from 44,000 (‘98) to 23,000 (‘99) to 9,000 ('00) data from his own agency indicated that, despite his claims to the contrary, the search rate for African-Americans increased dramatically, from 14 percent ('98) to 19 percent ('99) to 27 percent ('00).

ACLU - About the Campaign Against Racial Profiling



The Racial Justice Program's Campaign Against Racial Profiling fights law enforcement and private security practices that disproportionately target people of color and Muslims for investigation and enforcement. We represent individuals who have been victims of racial profiling by airlines, police, and government agencies, and our present work also encompasses major initiatives in public education, including the creation of a film, bustcard, “Know Your Rights”brochure, and a fact sheet on Highlights in the Fight Against Racial Profiling. Our advocacy also includes lobbying for the passage of data collection and anti-profiling legislation and litigation of egregious airline and highway profiling cases.

What Is Racial Profiling?

Racial Profiling is any police or private security practice in which a person is treated as a suspect because of his or her race, ethnicity, nationality or religion. This occurs when police investigate, stop, frisk, search or use force against a person based on such characteristics instead of evidence of a person's criminal behavior. It often involves the stopping and searching of people of color for traffic violations, known as "DWB" or "driving while black or brown." Although normally associated with African Americans and Latinos, racial profiling and "DWB" have also become shorthand phrases for police stops of Asians, Native Americans, and, increasingly after 9/11, Arabs, Muslims and South Asians.

Racial profiling can also involve pedestrian stops, "gang" databases, bicycle stops, use of police attack dogs, suspicion at stores and malls, immigration worksite raids, and in the 2000 presidential election in Florida, harassment on the way to polls, "voting while black or brown". Customs and other airport officials also engage in racial profiling of passengers. Read more about different kinds of racial profiling.

Is Racial Profiling Real?

Most Americans think so. A July 2001 Gallup poll reported that 55 percent of whites and 83 percent of blacks believe racial profiling is widespread. And the reports of thousands of racial and ethnic group members across the country add credibility to the perception that racial profiling is real. These are stories from all walks of life, not just hardworking everyday people, but celebrities, professional athletes, and members of the military. Also, reports of racial profiling come from respected members of communities of color such as police commanders, prosecutors, judges, state legislators, lawyers, dentists and even representatives in Congress, who have been victims.

Racial profiling is a new term for an old practice known by other names – institutional racism and discrimination – and owes its existence to prejudice that has existed in this country since slavery.

Tens of thousands of innocent drivers, pedestrians, and shoppers across the country are victims of racial profiling. And these discriminatory police stops and searches have reached epidemic proportions in recent years, fueled by the "War on Drugs" and the "War on Terror" that have given police a pretext to target people they think fit a "drug courier," "gang member," or "terrorist" profile. In fact, racial profiling is the first step in a long road that leads to the heavily disproportionate incarceration of people of color, especially young men, for drug-related crimes, and of Arabs, Muslims and South Asians for suspicion of terrorism. Racial profiling continues to occur even though people of color are no more likely than whites to use or sell drugs, and Arabs Muslims and South Asians are no more likely than whites to be terrorists.



What is Discrimination?

Discrimination

What is Discrimination?
Discrimination is unfair treatment because of an individual's membership in a particular group.

What groups are covered under Massachusetts civil rights laws?
Massachusetts civil rights law protects individuals from discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations, mortgage lending, credit, and education. Each of these areas offers protections to particular groups. For more information, see Are You In Need of Our Services?

I think I've been discriminated against, but I'm not sure how. Can you tell me what is considered discrimination?
In the employment context, discrimination begins with an "adverse employment action": something an employer does that hurts an employee, such as terminating the employee, not selecting the employee for a promotion, giving the employee a poor evaluation, harassing the employee with derogatory remarks or behaviors, or denying the employee's request for an accommodation of a disability. If you believe the adverse employment action happened to you because of your race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, age, disability, sexual orientation, genetics, or past involvement in a discrimination complaint, it could be discrimination. If the adverse action happened to various people from all different backgrounds, it may not be discrimination, and other agencies may be able to assist you.

In the housing, public accommodation, mortgage lending, or credit context, discrimination begins when a landlord, realtor, store employee, service provider, or lender treats one individual differently than others because of his or her membership in a particular group, such as race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, age, disability, sexual orientation, marital status, children, past involvement in a discrimination complaint, veteran status, or status as a recipient of public assistance. If you believe you have been treated differently than others because of your membership in one of these groups, it could be discrimination. If you feel you were treated unfairly, but it was not because of your membership in a group, it may not be discrimination, and other agencies may be able to assist you. For more information about housing discrimination, see our Unlawful Discrimination in Housing Quick Reference Guide

Filing a Complaint

How do I know if my employer is covered by state discrimination laws?
If you are a part- or full-time employee at a workplace that employs at least six part- or full-time employees, then your employer is covered. If you have questions about this, you can raise them when you come to file a complaint.

How do I know if I should file a complaint?
If you believe you have experienced discrimination within the last 300 days, the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination is available to assist you. If you visit one of our offices and meet with an intake worker, he or she will explain to you what kind of evidence you will need to prove that discrimination occurred.

How do I file a complaint?
You can file a complaint in person in either the Boston or Springfield office. No appointment is necessary. For information about each office's hours and directions to each office, please see the Hours and Directions page. Please review the Questionnaires and complete any that are relevant to your complaint. Please bring completed Questionnaires and the Interview/Intake Form with you when you come in to file your complaint.

Can I file a complaint over the phone?
The MCAD will generally not file a complaint by phone. Unless you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have an attorney representing you, you must visit our Boston or Springfield office to file a complaint with a member of our intake staff.

Do you accept complaints by mail?
The MCAD will generally not accept complaints by mail. We have found that an in-person meeting with an intake worker produces the most thorough information gathering. However, if you are represented by an attorney, he or she can mail in a complaint accompanied by a self-stamped envelope.

Can I file a complaint if I am not a U.S. citizen?
Your rights are not affected by your immigration status. The Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination will not question your citizenship or request a copy of your documentation.

How much time do I have to file a complaint?
If you are filing a complaint about employment discrimination, you have 300 days from the date of the most recent incident of discrimination you believe you experienced. For example, Alicia is being harassed on the job because she is an immigrant from Cuba. On February 1, her locker was spray painted with a slur about Cubans. On March 1, her supervisor made insulting remarks about Cubans. The last incident happened on April 1, when Alicia's coworker told an offensive joke that mocked individuals with accents. Alicia has 300 days from April 1 to file a complaint. Alicia must come to the MCAD to file her complaint by February 1 of the following year. If you are filing a complaint about housing discrimination, you have one year from the date of the most recent incident of discrimination you believe you experienced.

How much will it cost to file a complaint?
There is no fee to file a complaint. You may decide to seek an attorney to represent you in the process. If so, the attorney will discuss with you what his or her fee will be. However, the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination never collects a fee from someone who files a complaint.

What happens after I file my complaint?
Once your complaint is filed, your case will be assigned to an investigator. The investigator will contact you for more information about the case. The investigator may contact you to set up an "Investigative Conference" with the parties to learn more about the case, identify the issues in dispute, discuss possible available evidence, and explore the possibility of a negotiated settlement.

After I file my complaint, when will I hear from the Commission?
When you file a complaint at the Commission, your intake worker will give you a date for an investigative conference. You will be expected to attend the conference to explain your allegations.

I attended my investigative conference. When will I hear from the Commission about whether probable cause is found on my case?
The Commission expects to complete each case investigation within 18 months of filing. If probable cause is found ("probable cause" means it is more likely than not that discrimination occurred), you will proceed to the next stages of the complaint process, including opportunities for settlement and perhaps a public hearing.

Can I get in trouble or get fired for filing a complaint?
You have the right to file a complaint based on information you believe to be true, and it is unlawful to retaliate against you even if your belief was mistaken. The Commission notifies the organization named in your complaint of this provision of the law when it serves your charge. If you experience any form of retaliation after filing a complaint, we encourage you to contact your investigator immediately. If you experience retaliation after serving as a witness to someone else's complaint or speaking up about issues of discrimination in your workplace, you may file a complaint about the retaliation at the Commission just as you would file any other complaint of discrimination.

How much money am I entitled to if I win?
If your case results in a finding of discrimination, you may be awarded attorney's fees, back pay, front pay, emotional distress damages, and/or interest. The amount to be paid to the person who experienced discrimination varies depending on the nature of the case and how severe the discrimination was. Payments can range from hundreds of dollars to hundreds of thousands of dollars. However, discrimination is very difficult to prove, and most cases do not result in a discrimination finding or any payment to the complainant.

Do I need a lawyer to file a complaint?
No. It is optional to have a lawyer during the initial stages of the process. If you wish to retain an attorney, the Commission will work with your lawyer as we process the case. If "probable cause" is found at the investigation stage ("probable cause" means it is more likely than not that discrimination occurred), you may choose to have one of the Commission's staff attorneys represent you during later stages of the process.

Can you recommend a good lawyer for me?
The MCAD cannot make referrals to attorneys. However, other organizations do
provide referrals, such as the Massachusetts Bar Association. Also see the
Filing A ComplaintNotice brochure.

The MCAD

Where is the MCAD located?
We have three offices. One located in Boston, one in Springfield and one in Worcester.

In Boston, we are in The John McCormack Building, One Ashburton Place, Room 601, Boston, MA 02108.

Please see Hours and Directions for maps and detailed information about how to drive or take public transportation to the Commission's offices.

Where is One Ashburton?
One Ashburton Place runs parallel to BeaconStreet, between Bowdoin and Somerset Streets. As you face the State House, Bowdoin Street is on your right.

How do I get there?
By public transportation, take the T to ParkStreet Station. Or, take either Bus Number 43 or Bus Number 55. Both stop in front of the State House on Beacon. By car:From the West or the South South---find your way to Beacon Street, take the first left afterthe State House onto Bowdoin Street. From the East or North North---find your way to Cambridge Street (Massachusetts General Hospital or Boston City Hall) and ---turn onto Bowdoin Street.

What are your hours?
The MCAD office is open from 8:45 a.m. -5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Complaints are taken Monday -Friday, 8:45 a.m. -4:00 p.m.

What should I bring with me?
You should bring with you any relevant names, addresses, or telephone numbers, witnesses' names, and any other paperwork that will help investigate and establish your allegation of unlawful discrimination. You should also be able to give the date the alleged discrimination occurred.

For an employment case: You should have your employer's name, address, the approximate number of employees and the name of the parent company, if applicable.

For a housing case: Supply the landlord's or property manager's name, the real estate company's name, or the real estate agent's name, if appropriate.

For public accommodations: Bring the name of the owner or manager of the establishment.

Are there Federal agencies that protect my rights in employment and housing?
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which can be reached at 617-565-3200 and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) at 617-565-5320. 5320.

Where can I get a copy of MCAD's rules and regulations?
The MCAD's regulations are available online, or for purchase at: State Bookstore, Room 116, State House, Boston, MA 02133, (617) 727-2834 or Western Office of the Massachusetts Secretary of State, 436 Dwight Street, Springfield, MA 01103, (413) 784-1376

Maternity Leave and Pregnancy

What is my employer's responsibility regarding maternity leave?
For more information about employer's responsibilities regarding maternity leave, please read the section of this site about the MCAD's Maternity Leave Guidelines. The guidelines explain how much time off you may be entitled to, your rights to pay and benefits during your leave, and your responsibilities regarding leave.

Can an employer refuse to hire or promote me, change my working conditions, or fire me because I am pregnant?
Employment decisions based solely on pregnancy are unlawful.

Training

How do I Train Employees?
A guide describing training relative to topics, fees and contacts has been prepared and may be found at MCAD Training Services

Are Massachusetts employers required to provide discrimination prevention training to their employees?
While the MCAD strongly encourages employers to provide discrimination prevention training, there is no Massachusetts law requiring such training. Ensuring that all employees receive an overview of their rights and responsibilities within one year of hire or within one year of assuming a new supervisory position may help mitigate liability should discrimination occur. The MCAD can provide a list of discrimination prevention trainers to interested employers (call the Training Unit assistant at 617-994-6072).

Are Massachusetts employers required to provide sexual harassment prevention training to their employees?
Massachusetts General Law 151B section 3a strongly encourages employers to provide sexual harassment training for all new employees within one year of hire or within one year of assuming a new supervisory position. Providing such training may help mitigate liability should harassment occur. Harassment prevention training should address not only sexual harassment, but all forms of discriminatory harassment covered under state law. The MCAD can provide a list of harassment prevention trainers to interested employers (call the Training Unit assistant at 617-994-6072).

Wednesday, June 03, 2009

2nd Annual Immigrant Celebration




CELEBRATING OUR IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES:

THE MANY FACES OF CAPE COD


We Welcome You All Newcomers, International J-1 Students Guest Workers from CVS Pharmacy's , Stop & Shop Supermarket, Star Super Markets, Shaw's Supermarket, and other Cape Cod Businesses.




2nd Annual Immigrant Celebration


July 8-14, 2009



Where: Harwich Center – Location- Brooks Park

Rt. 39 & Oak Street

When: Sun., July 12th, 2- 8 PM

Event Theme: “Hand in Hand, Across All Boarders”


Cook out, BBQ, Community Picnic, Softball, Arts & Crafts Show, Live Music Steel Drum Band ,Other Musical Groups?



Sponsored by the Harwich No Place for Hate Committee, and The Barnstable County Human Rights Commission

Thursday, May 15, 2008

VOTE FOR LOCAL ARTIST for GOOGLE !

Hand in Hand
What if … the world stops racism, and all people , black and white, and all religions, can join together. Most people think racism has been over for a number of years, but everywhere in the world people are still battling because they are different.
Name: Brendan Lynch
School: Barnstable Horace Mann Charter School
State: Massachusetts


Doodle 4 Google is a competition where we invite K-12 students to reinvent Google's homepage logo. This year we Doodle 4 Google is a competition asked U.S. kids to doodle around the theme "What if...?"

Well, the entries are in, and we couldn't be more impressed. We received thousands of wonderful doodles, and choosing 40 finalists for the public vote had to be one of the most difficult but enjoyable jobs at Google in the past few weeks.

So the kids have done their part, and we've done ours. Now it's your turn to help out by picking your favorite doodles. Your votes will help us select a national winner to replace our usual logo on the Google homepage on May 22, 2008.

Friday, January 25, 2008

Harwich Residents Celebrate Diversity, In Dr. King’s Name

Cape Cod Chronical - By Allan Pollock

HARWICH — The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was a civil rights leader, a preacher and an orator, but most of all, a teacher. And, as evidenced by a gathering in his name Monday, Dr. King’s lessons still reverberate in Harwich.

The Harwich “No Place For Hate” group held a commemoration of Dr. King’s life at town hall on the holiday that bears his name. “It’s not a shopping day. It’s a thinking day, I believe,” organizer John Bangert said. The day is a time to remember Dr. King’s contributions to our nation, and to take time to meet and embrace unfamiliar neighbors, particularly those who don’t look like ourselves, Bangert said.

Speaking before a full meeting room, State Rep. Sarah Peake, D-Provincetown, said Americans tend to find each others’ differences, creating a nation of special interest groups. Even on Cape Cod, people see themselves as residents of a particular town, or as year-round residents, or as other subsets of a community, she said. Instead of finding distinctions, Dr. King taught people to find commonalities. When we follow that lesson, “this place we call home becomes bigger and bigger every day,” Peake said.

The keynote speaker at the event was Harwich attorney William Crowell, who has been a member of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) for the last 18 years. Two years ago, Crowell decided to visit the SPLC headquarters in Montgomery, Ala., which sits in what was the epicenter of the civil rights movement, less than a half mile from landmarks like the state capital, the Greyhound bus terminal, the Dexter Avenue Church, and the place where Rosa Parks was arrested for not yielding her bus seat to a white person. For a person looking to learn more about the civil rights movement, there is no better place than Montgomery, Crowell said.

The SPLC has two major approaches to fighting discrimination and hate: filing civil lawsuits against groups like the Ku Klux Klan, and distributing a “teaching tolerance” program for use in school systems around the country. The SPLC headquarters was burned down once, and the attorneys—who are paid by donations, not legal fees—regularly face death threats. To Crowell, who runs a practice of real estate law, it’s hard to imagine.
“These lawyers are very courageous,” he said.

Traveling alone to the Deep South was “a little bit intimidating,” Crowell said. In a Starbucks coffee shop at the Atlanta airport, he noticed a distinguished Black man who looked familiar. On a hunch, he later spoke to the woman with whom the man was speaking, and confirmed that it was civil rights leader and NAACP President Julian Bond. The man, she told Crowell, is her husband, and he was conferring with her about a speech he was about to give at the SPLC headquarters.

Later, Bond invited Crowell to share a ride to his hotel. Seated together in the back seat of the car, Crowell admitted he felt like Bond had nothing in common with him. “Here’s a white, New England conservative lawyer,” Crowell said with a chuckle. But the two did strike up a conversation, discussing whose alma mater had the more beautiful campus. The important lesson was that Bond made an effort to reach out to Crowell “to make me feel comfortable.”
Crowell also attended a service at the Dexter Avenue Church, where Dr. King was pastor. Seated on either side of Crowell were people of color. There, during the prayer portions of the service, as is the custom, the worshipers all held hands.

“That really had a powerful effect on me,” he said.
Seeing the SPLC headquarters, hearing Bond speak, and seeing the various civil rights landmarks in Montgomery all were powerful experiences, Crowell said. But in retrospect, the most meaningful parts of the trip were his encounters with strangers with whom he assumed he had little in common. In the end, building relationships with these strangers was the most meaningful part of the trip, and the part most germane to Dr. King’s message.

“That was a glimpse, for me, of what Martin Luther King was talking about: the promised land,” Crowell said.

After Crowell’s speech, the Harwich assembly held a moment of silence, and then heard a reading from the Quran from Harwich High School junior Amira Downes. Then, members of the community stood to offer their thoughts about Dr. King and the holiday. One of those to speak was Carolyn Crowell, attorney Crowell’s mother.


(Hey- Who in Harwich Remembers This event in 1964?)

Mrs. Crowell said that one of her sons, Timothy, (William’s older brother) was a member of the Harwich High School Class of 1964, the last group to make the traditional class trip to Washington, D.C. After seeing the sights, the students stopped to have lunch at a restaurant, and the manager pulled one of the chaperones aside. The restaurant, he explained, would be unable to serve some of the Harwich students because of their skin color.
“And the entire class rose up and walked out,” Mrs. Crowell said.

Harwich Remembers Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.



Harwich - About 60 people, many of them students from Harwich High School, turned out at town hall Monday for the annual commemoration of the birthday of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.


Organized by Harwich No Place for Hate, the program featured singing, talks and a moment of silence. John Bangert, a local leader of the No Place for Hate initiative, served as master of ceremonies while William Crowell, a Harwich Port real estate lawyer, gave the keynote speech. Crowell is a member of the Southern Poverty Law Center, in Montgomery, Ala., and related to the audience his experience at the dedication two years ago of the Civil Rights Memorial in Montgomery.


State Rep. Sarah Peake (4th Barnstable District) also addressed the group, and spoke about King’s legacy. Selectmen Robin Wilkins and Ed McManus attended.



Harwich High School junior Amira Downes offered a community prayer and affirmation in a reading from the Koran. Others stood or took the podium to express their feelings about King and the ongoing struggle for civil rights.


Local girl and boy scouts led the group in the Pledge of Allegience, and several scouts served as honor guard. The hour-long program took place in the Griffin Room.

Sunday, January 20, 2008

A Day ON, not a day off !



Monday, January 21, 2008
11:00 AM Harwich Town Hall –
3rd Annual MLK DAY
(A day on and not a day off!)





Commemorates the Life and Legacy of
Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Email: noplaceforhate@comcast.net
Phone: (508) 432-0545





Singing of our National Anthem ~ The Star Spangled Banner -1814

Words by Francis Scott Key ~ Music by John Stafford Smith




O say, can you see,

by the dawn’s early light,

What so proudly we hailed

at the twilight’s last gleaming?


Whose broad stripes and bright stars,

through the perilous fight,

O’er the ramparts we watched,

were so gallantly streaming?

And the rocket’s red glare,

the bombs bursting in air,

Gave proof through the night

that our flag was still there.

O say does that star spangled

banner yet wave

O’er the land of the free,

and the home of the brave.







Honor Guard Harwich Cub Scouts
Pack 76













Welcome and introductory remarks: NPFH organizing Committee members John Bangert, Selectman Ed Mc Manus, Harwich Youth Counselor - Sheila House, Jane Henry and Chuck Micciche




State Representative Sarah K. Peake


Massachusetts State Representative, Sarah K. Peake gets cooking with cranberries during the Harwich Cranberry Harvest Festival.







Harwich Celebrates Our Diversity!





“Welcome to the Harwich’s—a place for all to live, work and play

Get to know your Harwich neighbors

Mr. & Mrs. Mike Massad -Lebanese Americans Operators, of Harwich Center Getty Station
Mr. & Mrs. Marcos Miranda - Brazilian Americans, Miranda Landscaping, Harwich, MA

Keynote Speaker: William Crowell, Esq. *

Topic: Southern Poverty Law Center and Harwich


(*) Bill Crowell, a lifelong resident of Harwich. lives in Harwich with his wife Dru and their children. Bill is a graduate of Harwich High School, Cornell University, and Suffolk University Law School. He is in his 30th year of practicing law in Harwich Port and for the last fifteen years has been a member of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is headquartered in Montgomery, Alabama, a block away from the Dexter Avenue Church in which Dr. Martin Luther King served as Pastor. Two years ago, Bill was invited to attend the dedication of the Civil Rights Memorial constructed across the street from the Law Center in Montgomery and would like to relate his experiences from that trip.






Community Prayers and Affirmations - Lead by Harwich High School junior Ms. Amira Downes, in the Islamic tradition.

We also have a dream!
And now a word from our Community!
(Share Your Dream in a phrase or in a word!)


Closing Hymn: We Shall Overcome


1.
We shall overcome
We shall overcome
We shall overcome some day
·
· CHORUS:


Oh, deep in my heart
I do believe
We shall overcome some day


· 2.
We'll walk hand in hand
We'll walk hand in hand
We'll walk hand in hand some day
· CHORUS

3.
We shall all be free
We shall all be free
We shall all be free some day
· CHORUS

4.
We are not afraid
We are not afraid
We are not afraid some day
· CHORUS

5.
We are not alone
We are not alone
We are not alone some day
· CHORUS

6.
The whole wide world around
The whole wide world around
The whole wide world around some day
· CHORUS

7.
We shall overcome
We shall overcome
We shall overcome some day
· CHORUS


Reception: Albro House

Town of Harwich No Place for Hate Committee





Sunday, March 11, 2007

US Muslims Find a Way Across Cultural Divides




By ANDREA ELLIOTT

Under the glistening dome of a mosque on Long Island, hundreds of men sat cross-legged on the floor. Many were doctors and engineers born in Pakistan and India. Dressed in khakis, polo shirts and the odd silk tunic, they fidgeted and whispered.

One thing stood between them and dinner: A visitor from Harlem was coming to ask for money.

A towering black man with a gray-flecked beard finally swept into the room, his bodyguard trailing him. Wearing a long, embroidered robe and matching hat, he took the microphone and began talking about a different group of Muslims, the thousands of African-Americans who have found Islam in prison.

“We are all brothers and sisters,” said the visitor, known as Imam Talib.

The men stared. To some of them, it seemed, he was from another planet. As the imam returned their gaze, he had a similar sensation. “They live in another world,” he later said.

Only 28 miles separate Imam Talib’s mosque in Harlem from the Islamic Center of Long Island. The congregations they each serve — African-Americans at the city mosque and immigrants of South Asian and Arab descent in the suburbs — represent the largest Muslim populations in the United States. Yet a vast gulf divides them, one marked by race and class, culture and history.

For many African-American converts, Islam is an experience both spiritual and political, an expression of empowerment in a country they feel is dominated by a white elite. For many immigrant Muslims, Islam is an inherited identity, and America a place of assimilation and prosperity.

For decades, these two Muslim worlds remained largely separate. But last fall, Imam Talib hoped to cross that distance in a venture that has become increasingly common since Sept. 11. Black Muslims have begun advising immigrants on how to mount a civil rights campaign. Foreign-born Muslims are giving African-Americans roles of leadership in some of their largest organizations. The two groups have joined forces politically, forming coalitions and backing the same candidates.

It is a tentative and uneasy union, seen more typically among leaders at the pulpit than along the prayer line. But it is critical, a growing number of Muslims believe, to surviving a hostile new era.

“Muslims will not be successful in America until there is a marriage between the indigenous and immigrant communities,” said Siraj Wahhaj, an African-American imam in New York with a rare national following among immigrant Muslims. “There has to be a marriage.”

The divide between black and immigrant Muslims reflects a unique struggle facing Islam in America. Perhaps nowhere else in the world are Muslims from so many racial, cultural and theological backgrounds trying their hands at coexistence. Only in Mecca, during the obligatory hajj, or pilgrimage, does such diversity in the faith come to life, between black and white, rich and poor, Sunni and Shiite.

“This is a new experiment in the history of Islam,” said Ali S. Asani, a professor of Islamic studies at Harvard University.

That evening in October, Imam Al-Hajj Talib ‘Abdur-Rashid drove to Westbury, on Long Island, with a task he would have found unthinkable years ago.

He would ask for donations from the immigrant community he refers to, somewhat bitterly, as the “Muslim elite.”

But he needed funds, and the doors of immigrant mosques seemed to be opening. Imam Talib and other African-American leaders had formed a national “indigenous Muslim” organization, and he knew that during the holy month of Ramadan, the Islamic Center of Long Island could raise thousands of dollars in an evening.

It is a place where BMWs and Mercedes-Benzes fill the parking lot, and Coach purses are perched along prayer lines.

In Harlem, many of Imam Talib’s congregants get to the mosque by bus or subway, and warm themselves with space heaters in a drafty, brick building.

Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, Imam Talib had only a distant connection to the Islamic Center of Long Island. In passing, he had met Faroque Khan, an Indian-born doctor who helped found the mosque, but the two had little in common.

Imam Talib, 56, is a thundering prison chaplain whose mosque traces its roots to Malcolm X. He is a first-generation Muslim.

Dr. Khan, 64, is a mild-mannered pulmonologist who collects Chinese antiques and learned to ski on the slopes of Vermont. He is a first-generation American.

But in the turmoil that followed Sept. 11, the imam and the doctor found themselves unexpectedly allied.

“The more separate we stay, the more targeted we become,” Dr. Khan said.

Each man recognizes what the other has to offer. African-Americans possess a cultural and historical fluency that immigrants lack, said Dr. Khan; they hold an unassailable place in America from which to defend their faith.

For Imam Talib, immigrants provide a crucial link to the Muslim world and its tradition of scholarship, as well as the wisdom that comes with an “unshattered Islamic heritage.”


Both groups have their practical virtues, too. African-Americans know better how to mobilize in America, both men say, and immigrants tend to have deeper pockets.

Still, it is one thing to talk about unity, Imam Talib said, and another to give it life. Before his visit to Long Island last fall, he had never asked Dr. Khan and his mosque to match their rhetoric with money.

“You have to have a litmus test,” he said.

One Faith, Many Histories

Imam Talib and Dr. Khan did not warm to each other when they met in May 2000, at a gathering in Chicago of Muslim leaders.

The imam found the silver-haired doctor faintly smug and paternalistic. It was an attitude he had often whiffed from well-to-do immigrant Muslims. Dr. Khan found Imam Talib straightforward to the point of bluntness.

The uneasy introduction was, for both men, emblematic of the strained relationship between their communities.

Imam Talib and other black Muslims trace their American roots to the arrival of Muslims from West Africa as slaves in the South. That historical link gave rise to Islam-inspired movements in the 20th century, the most significant of which was the Nation of Islam.

The man who founded the Nation in 1930, W. D. Fard, spread the message that American blacks belonged to a lost Muslim tribe and were superior to the “white, blue-eyed devils” in their midst. Under Mr. Fard’s successor, Elijah Muhammad, the Nation flourished in the 1960s amid the civil rights struggle and the emergence of a black-separatist movement.

Overseas, Islamic scholars found the group’s teachings on race antithetical to the faith. The schism narrowed after 1975, when Mr. Muhammad’s son Warith Deen Mohammed took over the Nation, bringing it in line with orthodox Sunni Islam. Louis Farrakhan parted ways with Mr. Mohammed — taking the Nation’s name and traditional teachings with him — but the majority of African-American adherents came to embrace the same Sunni practice that dominates the Muslim world.

Still, divisions between African-American and immigrant Muslims remained pronounced long after the first large waves of South Asians and Arabs arrived in the United States in the 1960s.

Today, of the estimated six million Muslims who live in the United States, about 25 percent are African-American, 34 percent are South Asian and 26 percent are Arab, said John Zogby, a pollster who has studied the American Muslim population.

“Given the extreme from which we came, I would say that the immigrant Muslims have been brotherly toward us,” Warith Deen Mohammed, who has the largest following of African-American Muslims, said in an interview. “But I think they’re more skeptical than they admit they are. I think they feel more comfortable with their own than they feel with us.”

For many African-Americans, conversion to Islam has meant parting with mainstream culture, while Muslim immigrants have tended toward assimilation. Black converts often take Arabic names, only to find foreign-born Muslims introducing themselves as “Moe” instead of “Mohammed.”

The tensions are also economic. Like Dr. Khan, many Muslim immigrants came to the United States with advanced degrees and quickly prospered, settling in the suburbs. For decades, African-Americans watched with frustration as immigrants sent donations to causes overseas, largely ignoring the problems of poor Muslims in the United States.

Imam Talib found it impossible to generate interest at immigrant mosques in the 1999 police shooting of Amadou Diallo, who was Muslim. “What we’ve found is when domestic issues jump up, like police brutality, all the sudden we’re by ourselves,” he said.

Some foreign-born Muslims say they are put off by the racial politics of many black converts. They struggle to understand why African-American Muslims have been reluctant to meet with law enforcement officials in the wake of Sept. 11. For their part, black Muslim leaders complain that immigrants have failed to learn their history, which includes a pattern of F.B.I. surveillance dating back to the roots of the Nation of Islam.

The ironies are, at times, stinging.

“From the immigrant community, I hear that African-Americans have to learn how to work in the system,” said Nihad Awad, the executive director of the Council on American Islamic Relations, adding that this was not his personal opinion.

At the heart of the conflict is a question of leadership. Much to the ire of African-Americans, many immigrants see themselves as the rightful leaders of the faith in America by virtue of their Islamic schooling and fluency in Arabic, the original language of the Koran.

“What does knowing Arabic have to do with the quality of your prayer, your fast, your relationship with God?” asked Ihsan Bagby, an associate professor of Islamic studies at the University of Kentucky in Lexington. “But African-Americans have to ask themselves why have they not learned more in these years.”

Every year in Chicago, the two largest Muslim conventions in the country — one sponsored by an immigrant organization and the other by Mr. Mohammed’s — take place on the same weekend, in separate parts of the city.

The long-simmering tension boiled over into a public rift with the 2000 presidential elections. That year, a powerful coalition of immigrant Muslims endorsed George W. Bush (because of a promise to stop the profiling of Arabs).

The nation’s most prominent African-American Muslims complained that they were never consulted. The following summer, when Imam Talib vented his frustration at a meeting with immigrant leaders in Washington, a South Asian man turned to him, he recalled, and said, “I don’t understand why all of you African-American Muslims are always so angry about everything.”

Imam Talib searched for an answer he thought the man could understand.

“African-Americans are like the Palestinians of this land,” he finally said. “We’re not just some angry black people. We’re legitimately outraged and angry.”

The room fell silent.

Soon after, black leaders announced the creation of the Muslim Alliance in North America, their first national “indigenous” organization.

But the fallout over the elections was soon eclipsed by Sept. 11, when Muslim immigrants found themselves under intense public scrutiny. They began complaining about “profiling” and “flying while brown,” appropriating language that had been largely the domain of African-Americans.

It was around this time that Dr. Khan became, as he put it, enlightened. A few weeks before the terrorist attacks, he read the book “Black Rage,” by William H. Grier and Price M. Cobbs. The book, published in 1968, explores the psychological woes of African-Americans, and how the impact of racism is carried through generations.

“It helped me understand that even before you’re born, things that happened a hundred years ago can affect you,” Dr. Khan said. “That was a big change in my thinking.”

He sent an e-mail message to fellow Muslims, including Imam Talib, sharing what he had learned.

The Harlem imam was pleased, if not yet convinced.

“I just encouraged the brother to keep going,” Imam Talib said.

An Oasis in Harlem

One windswept night in Harlem, cars rolled past the corner of West 113th Street and St. Nicholas Avenue. A police siren blared as men huddled by a neon-lit Laundromat.

Across the street stood a brown brick building, lifeless from the outside. But upstairs, in a cozy carpeted room, rows of men and women chanted.

“Ya Hakim. Ya Allah.” O wise one. O God.

Imam Talib led the chant, swathed in a black satin robe. It was Ramadan’s holiest evening, the Night of Power. As the voices died down, he spotted his bodyguard swaying.

“Take it easy there, Captain,” Imam Talib said. “As long as you don’t jump and shout it’s all right.”

Laughter trickled through the mosque, where a translucent curtain separated men in skullcaps from women in African-print gowns.

“We’re just trying to be ourselves, you know?” Imam Talib said. “Within the tradition.”

“That’s right,” said one woman.

The imam continued: “And we can’t let other people, from other cultures, come and try to make us clones of them. We came here as Muslims.”

He was feeling drained. He had just returned from the Manhattan Detention Complex, where he works as a chaplain. Some of the mosque’s men were back in jail.

“We need power,” he said quietly. “Without that, we’ll destroy ourselves.”

Since its birth in 1964, the Mosque of Islamic Brotherhood has been a fortress of stubborn faith, persevering through the crack wars, welfare, AIDS, gangs, unemployment, diabetes, broken families and gentrification.

The mosque was founded in a Brooklyn apartment by Shaykh-‘Allama Al-Hajj K. Ahmad Tawfiq, a follower of Malcolm X. The Sunni congregation boomed in the 1970s, starting a newspaper and opening a school and a health food store.

With city loans, it bought its current building. Fourteen families moved in, creating a bold Muslim oasis in a landscape of storefront churches and liquor stores. The mosque claimed its corner by drenching the sidewalk in dark green paint, the color associated with Islam.

The paint has since faded. The school is closed. Many of the mosque’s members can no longer afford to live in a neighborhood where brownstones sell for millions of dollars.

But an aura of dignity prevails. The women normally pray one floor below the men, in a scrubbed, tidy room scented with incense. Their bathroom is a shrine of gold curtains and lavender soaps. A basket of nylon roses hides a hole in the wall.

Most of the mosque’s 160 members belong to the working class, and up to a third of the men are former convicts.

Some congregants are entrepreneurs, professors, writers and musicians. Mos Def and Q-Tip have visited with Imam Talib, who carries the nickname “hip-hop imam.”

Mosque celebrations are a blend of Islam and Harlem. In October, at the end of Ramadan, families feasted on curried chicken and collard greens, grilled fish and candied yams.

Just before the afternoon prayer, a lean man in a black turtleneck rose to give the call. He was Yusef Salaam, whose conviction in the Central Park jogger case was later overturned.

Many of the mosque’s members embraced Islam in search of black empowerment, not black separatism. They describe racial equality as a central tenet of their faith. Yet for some, the promise of Islam has been at odds with the reality of Muslims.

One member, Aqilah Mu’Min, lives in the Parkchester section of the Bronx, a heavily Bangladeshi neighborhood. Whenever she passes women in head scarves, she offers the requisite Muslim greeting. Rarely is it returned. “We have a theory that says Islam is perfect, human beings are not,” said Ms. Mu’Min, a city fraud investigator.

It was the simplicity of Islam that drew Imam Talib.

Raised a Christian, he spent the first part of his youth in segregated North Carolina. As a teenager, he read “The Autobiography of Malcolm X” twice. He began educating himself about the faith at age 19, when as an aspiring actor he was cast in a play about a man who had left the Nation of Islam.

But his conversion was more spiritual than political, he said.

“I’d like to think that even if I was a white man, I’d still be a Muslim because that’s the orientation of my soul,” the imam said.

He has learned some Arabic, and traveled once to the Middle East, for hajj. Yet he feels more comfortable with the Senegalese and Guinean Muslims who have settled in Harlem than with many Arabs and South Asians.

He is trying to reach out, but is often disappointed.

In November, he accepted a last-minute invitation to meet with hundreds of immigrants at the Islamic Cultural Center of New York, an opulent mosque on East 96th Street.

The group, the Coalition for Muslim School Holidays, was trying to persuade the city to recognize two Muslim holidays on the school calendar. The effort, Imam Talib learned, had been nearly a year in the making, and no African-American leaders had been consulted.

He was stunned. After all, he had led a similar campaign in the 1980s, resulting in the suspension of alternate-side parking for the same holidays.

“They are unaware of the foundations upon which they are standing,” he said.

Backlash in the Suburbs

Brush Hollow Road winds through a quiet stretch of Long Island, past churches and diners and leafy cul-de-sacs. In this tranquil tableau, the Islamic Center of Long Island announces itself proudly, a Moorish structure of white concrete topped by a graceful dome.

Sleek sedans and S.U.V.’s circle the property as girls with Barbie backpacks hop out and scurry to the Islamic classes they call “Sunday school.”

It is a testament to America’s influence on the mosque that its liveliest time of the week is not Friday, Islam’s holy day, but Sunday.

Boys in hooded sweatshirts smack basketballs along the pavement by a sign that reads “No pray, no play.” Young mothers in Burberry coats exchange kisses and chatter.

For members of the mosque — many of whom work in Manhattan and cannot make the Friday prayer — Sunday is the day to reflect and connect.

The treasurer, Rizwan Qureshi, frantically greeted drivers one Sunday morning with a flier advertising a fund-raiser.

“We’re trying to get Barack Obama,” Mr. Qureshi, a banker born in Karachi, told a woman in a gold-hued BMW.

“We need some real money,” he called out to another driver.

The mosque began with a group of doctors, engineers and other professionals from Pakistan and India who settled in Nassau County in the early 1970s.

“Our kids would come home from school and say, ‘Where is my Christmas tree, my Hanukkah lights?’ ” recalled Dr. Khan, who lives in nearby Jericho. “We didn’t want them to grow up unsure of who they are.”

Since opening in 1993, the mosque has thrived, with assets now valued at more than $3 million. Hundreds of people pray there weekly, and thousands come on Muslim holidays.

The mosque has an unusually modern, democratic air. Men and women worship with no partition between them. A different scholar delivers the Friday sermon every week, in English.

Perhaps most striking, a majority of female worshipers do not cover their heads outside the mosque.

“I think it’s important to find the fine line between the religion and the age in which we live,” said Nasreen Wasti, 43, a contract analyst for Lufthansa. “I’m sure I will have to answer to God for not covering myself. But I’m also satisfied by many of the good deeds I am doing.”

She and other members use words like “progressive” to describe their congregation. But after Sept. 11, a different image took hold.

In October 2001, a Newsday article quoted a member of the mosque as asking “who really benefits from such a horrible tragedy that is blamed on Muslims and Arabs?” A co-president of the mosque was also quoted saying that Israel “would benefit from this tragedy.”

Conspiracy theories about Sept. 11 have long circulated among Muslims, and Dr. Khan had heard discussion among congregants. Such talk, he said, was the product of two forces: a deep mistrust of America’s motives in the Middle East and a refusal, among many Muslims, to engage in self-criticism.

“You blame the other guy for your own shortcomings,” said Dr. Khan.

He visited synagogues and churches after the article ran, reassuring audiences that the comments did not reflect the official position of the mosque, which condemned the attacks.

But to Congressman Peter T. King, whose district is near the mosque, that condemnation fell short. He began publicly criticizing Dr. Khan, asserting that he had failed to fully denounce the statements made by the men.

“He’s definitely a radical,” Mr. King said of Dr. Khan in an interview. “You cannot, in the context of Sept. 11, allow those statements to be made and not be a radical.”

When asked about Mr. King’s comments, Dr. Khan replied proudly, “I thought we had freedom of speech.”

It hardly seems possible that Mr. King and Dr. Khan were once friends.

Mr. King used to dine at Dr. Khan’s home. He attended the wedding of Dr. Khan’s son, Arif, in 1995. At the mosque’s opening, it was Mr. King who cut the ribbon.

After Sept. 11, the mosque experienced the sort of social backlash felt by Muslims around the country. Anonymous callers left threatening messages, and rocks were hurled at children from passing cars.

The attention waned over time. But Mr. King cast a new light on the mosque in 2004 with the release of his novel “Vale of Tears.”

In the novel, terrorists affiliated with a Long Island mosque demolish several buildings, killing hundreds of people. One of the central characters is a Pakistani heart surgeon whose friendship with a congressman has grown tense.

“By inference, it’s me,” Dr. Khan said of the Pakistani character. (Mr. King said it was a “composite character” based on several Muslims he knows.)

For Dr. Khan, his difficulties after Sept. 11 come as proof that Muslims cannot stay fragmented. “It’s a challenge for the whole Muslim community — not just for me,” he said. “United we stand, divided we fall.”

The Litmus Test

Imam Talib and his bodyguard set off to Westbury before dusk on Oct. 14. They passed a fork on the Long Island Expressway, and the imam peered out the window. None of the signs were familiar.

He checked his watch and saw that he was late, adding to his unease. He had visited the mosque a few times before, but never felt entirely at home.

“I’m conscious of being a guest,” he said. “They treat me kindly and nicely. But I know where I am.”

At the Islamic Center of Long Island, Dr. Khan was also getting nervous. Hundreds of congregants had gathered after fasting all day for Ramadan. The scent of curry drifted mercilessly through the mosque.

Dr. Khan sprang to his feet and took the microphone. He improvised.

“All of us need to learn from and understand the contributions of the Muslim indigenous community,” he said. “Starting with Malcolm X.”

It had been six years since Imam Talib and Dr. Khan first encountered each other in Chicago. Back then, Imam Talib rarely visited immigrant mosques, and Dr. Khan had only a peripheral connection to African-American Muslims.

In the 1980s, the doctor had become aware of the high number of Muslim inmates while working as the chief of medicine for a hospital in Nassau County that oversaw health care at the county prison. His mosque began donating prayer rugs, Korans and skullcaps to prisoners around the country. But his interaction with black Muslim leaders was limited until Sept. 11.

After Dr. Khan read the book “Black Rage,” he and Imam Talib began serving together on the board of a new political task force. Finally, in 2005, Dr. Khan invited the imam to his mosque to give the Friday sermon.

That February, Imam Talib rose before the Long Island congregation. Blending verses in the Koran with passages from recent American history, he urged the audience to learn from the civil rights movement.

Dr. Khan listened raptly. Afterward, over sandwiches, he asked Imam Talib for advice. He wanted to thaw the relationship between his mosque and African-American mosques on Long Island. The conversation continued for hours.

“The real searching for an answer, searching for a solution, was coming from Dr. Khan,” said Imam Talib. “I could just feel it.”

Dr. Khan began inviting more African-American leaders to speak at his mosque, and welcomed Imam Talib there last October to give a fund-raising pitch for his organization, the Muslim Alliance in North America. The group had recently announced a “domestic agenda,” with programs to help ex-convicts find housing and jobs and to standardize premarital counseling for Muslims in America.

After the imam arrived that evening and spoke, he sat on the floor next to a blazer-clad Dr. Khan. As they feasted on kebabs, the doctor made a pitch of his own: The teenagers of his mosque could spend a day at Imam Talib’s mosque, as the start of a youth exchange program. The imam nodded slowly.

Minutes later, the mosque’s president, Habeeb Ahmed, hurried over. The congregants had so far pledged $10,000.

“Alhamdulillah,” the imam said. Praise be to God.

It was the most Imam Talib had raised for his group in one evening.

As the dinner drew to a close, the imam looked for his bodyguard. They had a long drive home and he did not want to lose his way again.

Dr. Khan asked Imam Talib how he had gotten lost.

“Inner city versus the suburbs,” the imam replied a bit testily.

Then he smiled.

“The only thing it proves,” he said, “is that I need to come by here more often.”

US judge halts the removal of more detainees from Cape Cod


DSS, immigration agency ordered to sort out problem of left-behind children

A federal judge ordered immigration officials yesterday not to move out of state any of the remaining detainees from Tuesday's raid of a New Bedford sweatshop and to allow them access to lawyers.

Judge Richard G. Stearns also instructed the state Department of Social Services and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency to work together to solve the problem of detainees who are mothers or primary caregivers and have been separated from their children. He ordered those agencies to give him a progress report by Tuesday.

"We haven't won, but we have made progress," said lawyer Harvey Kaplan after the hearing at the Moakley Federal Courthouse in South Boston. Kaplan is representing a group of immigration advocates who filed an injunction against the agency Thursday afternoon.

Governor Deval Patrick said yesterday he was receiving more cooperation from immigration officials after several days of tensions over state officials' access to the detainees.

"We now have full names, addresses, and dates of birth," Patrick said at a press conference at a healthcare center in South Boston. He said state officials would compare the information with lists compiled by the advocates during extensive interviews with families affected by the raid.

Today, the Department of Social Services plans to send two teams of 18 people to Texas -- one to El Paso, and the other to Harlingen -- said spokeswoman Denise Monteiro . Commissioner Harry Spence will travel to Harlingen.

Patrick also said that officials from Immigration and Customs Enforcement had agreed to release a mother who was flown to Texas. State officials learned the woman was a mother when her 7-year-old child called a hot line created to reunite families following the raid.

"I understand that the federal government has a job to do in enforcing immigration laws and there was a practical reason for them doing it the way they did it," Patrick said. "The problem is when they executed it, it turned into a race to the airport."

Ali Noorani, executive director of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition, said during the press conference at the courthouse: "ICE really had no idea about the impact of their actions. They're trying to clean up a mess."

The raid Tuesday morning at Michael Bianco Inc. sent shockwaves through New Bedford's immigrant community, as 361 workers, mostly from Guatemala and El Salvador, were detained because they could not prove they were in this country legally. The owner of the company, Francesco Insolia, and three of his managers were arrested for conspiring to hire illegal aliens. The four posted bond, and the company was open for business the next day.

"I want to extend my most heartfelt sympathy to the families of our loyal workers whose lives have been terribly disrupted by the events of the last few days," Insolia said in a statement. "When the dust has settled on this unfortunate episode, I guarantee that everyone that can be hired and wants to return to work will have a job at Michael Bianco Inc."

"I urge you to withhold judgment until all of the facts come out and these accusations can be confronted in a less chaotic environment and in the proper forum," the statement said.

According to immigration officials, about 70 of the 361 workers detained Tuesday morning have been released . Ninety people are being held in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, at the Bristol County House of Correction , the Barnstable County House of Correction , and the Wyatt Federal Detention Center in Central Falls, R.I. There are 207 detainees in Texas, with 91 at the Port Isabel Service Processing Center in Harlingen and 116 at the El Paso Service Processing Center.

Eight minors were picked up during the raid. Three of them have been released, but the remaining five were taken to a facility in Miami. The immigration agency was in the process of getting them back to New Bedford, said spokesman Marc Raimondi.

"As we have been doing since before the enforcement operation began, we continue to coordinate closely with our federal, state, and local counterparts, including DSS," Raimondi said. "The fact that DSS has not notified us of a single child in a risky or inappropriate setting. . . . says that the cooperation between us has yielded the results intended."