Pretextual Traffic Stops Will Not Be Banned in the Immediate Future
As we have previously covered, there has been controversy surrounding the Chicago Police Department’s use of “pretextual stops”, a practice that some advocates argue disproportionality effects minorities. A “pretextual stop” is when a police officer stops a vehicle for a minor traffic violation (such as not wearing a seatbelt or expired license plate tags) with the real intention of using the stop and encounter to investigate something more serious, like drug possession or other criminal activity, even though they don’t have probable cause for that more serious suspicion at the onset of the stop. Recently, advocates have argued that the Department should adopt a new policy that would ban pretextual traffic stops entirely. However, the proposal to outright ban the practice was recently rejected by the CPD’s oversight board, the Community Commission for Public Safety and Accountability (“COPA”), after it held extensive public hearings concerning the use of pretextual traffic stops and the proposed policy. While it did “acknowledge” in their new policy that, “Pretextual Traffic Stops can be perceived by some members of the community as negative, biased or unlawful” but stated that their use in the future “must strike a balance between identifying those engaged in criminal conduct and the community’s sense of fairness” given the police ability to use such a tactic as a crime prevention strategy. Traffic stops have drawn the attention and criticism of advocates for police reform, with the independent monitoring team in charge of enforcing the consent decree finding a direct correlation between the increase of traffic stops as the number of pedestrian stops dropped, in a June 2023 report. Since the increase in traffic stops has been reported, the city has found itself the subject of a class-action lawsuit accusing the Police Department of targeting minorities with their use of traffic stops, with nearly 79% of drivers subject to traffic stops in the city being either black or Latino, according to a report from a coalition of groups that monitor these issues. While pretextual stops will remain permissible under this new CPD policy, advocacy groups will almost certainly continue to push for reform of the tactic, if not an outright ban in the future. It is also important to remember that even though pretextual stops remain legal, the use of a permissible stop can become a violation of an individual’s Constitutional rights under the right conditions and facts. Many police interactions that are lawful at the onset become unlawful and in violation of constitutional rights. Practically, that means that a defendant who was arrested and charged after police uncover evidence during a pretextual may have ways to successful challenge the introduction of evidence in their criminal case and throw it out since it was recovered as a result of constitutional violation. Anyone who is facing charges for what they believe was an unconstitutional stop, search, or seizure should consult an experienced criminal defense attorney who can help defend their rights against impermissible and illegal police conduct.
