Law enforcement culture is stubborn. The frequency and notoriety of illegal and improper conduct by police officers in Michigan and across the nation has done little to prompt changes in the way police do their jobs. Investment in cultural-competency and de-escalation training often yields few observable returns. Officers may be asked to police in a new way, but they are often committed to doing things the old way. Unfortunately, the old way is grounded in explicit and implicit racial presumptions and stereotypes and less than scrupulous adherence to the Constitution. 

A recent independent report for the Michigan State Police (MSP), commissioned by the agency in response to ACLU of Michigan advocacy, examines reasons for racial disparities in traffic stops and provides a breakthrough opportunity to address structural racism in the agency with surgical precision.  

The report exposes many practices and policies of MSP that reflect an old way of policing. Among many other things, it reports that MSP troopers are often loosely supervised and left to assign themselves to areas with high concentrations of people of color. They are apparently motivated to do so in part by informal traffic stop quota expectations considered for performance evaluations.  

It doesn’t end there. When troopers initiate encounters, they are encouraged to “go beyond the stop,” which many troopers interpret as a license to look for evidence of crimes that had nothing to do with why the motorist was pulled over in the first place. Researchers reported that, as just one example, troopers consider drivers who keep both hands on the wheel and stare straight ahead during the stop as suspicious and deserving of investigation. This is ironic because many young Black people are sternly instructed to conduct themselves in this way to prevent impulsive police overreactions. The report adds that “it is rather crucial to note that ‘going beyond the stop’ frequently occurs in predominantly minority communities.”   

Much More Than Statistics 

Camara Sankofa and Shanelle Thomas, an African American couple, were victims of troopers who engaged in some of the worst excesses of “going beyond the stop.” Their experience became the subject of an ACLU lawsuit against the troopers involved. Troopers fabricated a reason for stopping the couple and over the course of nearly 90 minutes subjected them to prolonged interrogation and fruitless searches of their vehicle by troopers and canines. In the end, they were allowed to leave without a ticket or a warning. You can watch a compelling video showing the incident, and the effect it had on Mr. Sankofa and Ms. Thomas below.

%3Ciframe%20class%3D%22media-youtube-player%22%20width%3D%22580%22%20height%3D%22324%22%20title%3D%22ACLU%20Sues%20Michigan%20State%20Police%20for%20Racial%20Profiling%20and%20Unlawful%20Search%20and%20Seizure%22%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube-nocookie.com%2Fembed%2FpMm69L1MzGc%3Fwmode%3Dopaque%26amp%3Bcontrols%3D1%26amp%3Bmodestbranding%3D1%26amp%3Brel%3D0%26amp%3Bshowinfo%3D0%26amp%3Bcolor%3Dwhite%26autoplay%3D1%26version%3D3%26playsinline%3D1%22%20name%3D%22ACLU%20Sues%20Michigan%20State%20Police%20for%20Racial%20Profiling%20and%20Unlawful%20Search%20and%20Seizure%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20id%3D%22ACLU%20Sues%20Michigan%20State%20Police%20for%20Racial%20Profiling%20and%20Unlawful%20Search%20and%20Seizure%22%20allow%3D%22autoplay%22%3EVideo%20of%20ACLU%20Sues%20Michigan%20State%20Police%20for%20Racial%20Profiling%20and%20Unlawful%20Search%20and%20Seizure%3C%2Fiframe%3E

Privacy statement. This embed will serve content from youtube-nocookie.com.

The couple’s experience was legally problematic because they should not have been stopped in the first place unless the troopers had probable cause to believe they had committed a traffic violation. After the stop, they should not have been detained any longer than was required to issue them a ticket or a warning. Before we filed suit on the couple’s behalf, we suggested to MSP that litigation might be unnecessary if they agreed to commission an independent study of the agency and its policies and practices related to traffic stops. When the suggestion was declined, we initiated a lawsuit, and eventually, MSP agreed to the study that is the subject of the recently released report. This set the stage for a settlement of the case that included as one of its terms the opportunity for the ACLU to have full opportunity to share its own findings, concerns, and suggestions with the researchers. The resulting report is an invaluable document that validates observations made by the ACLU over the course of time and, as a practical matter, pressures MSP leadership to make needed reforms. 

Years in the Making  

The journey to this report was a long one. Back in 2016, the ACLU received separate complaints from African American motorists who believed their race was the sole reason they were stopped by MSP while traveling on Interstate 94. Though these people were unacquainted, their experiences were remarkably similar. They were accused of following too closely behind tractor-trailers, they were asked to exit their vehicles, their vehicles were searched, and they were asked whether they were transporting drugs or other contraband before a canine officer brought a dog to sniff the vehicles. 

The ACLU submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for records that documented the history of stops made by the troopers who stopped the drivers who complained to us, and the records showed a suspicious pattern of stops of people of color. In response to our concerns, MSP acknowledged there were, at that time, no reliable or consistent records of the racial identities of persons who were stopped. This prompted a new policy of mandatory reporting of racial identity.  

After the new policy had been in effect for several months, we followed up with additional Freedom of Information Act requests concerning additional troopers. The records not only showed remarkable racial disparities but also raised suspicions that troopers were checking the “unknown” racial category box to obfuscate racial stop patterns. A significant number of drivers whose race was designated unknown had Spanish and South Asian surnames. 

In an apparent effort to address these concerns, MSP conducted its own study and pronounced that because traffic stop data correlated with racial demographics shown by census figures, MSP was not engaged in discriminatory policing. The ACLU dismissed the findings because they were unscientific and failed to take into account that stops made in vast stretches of the state that are racially homogeneous likely diluted and neutralized racially disparate stop patterns occurring in more diverse regions of Michigan.  

Two subsequent scientific reports, published in 2021 and 2022 by researchers at Michigan State University, definitively confirmed racial disparities in MSP stops. The recently issued report builds on those MSU findings and explores institutional factors contributing to the racial disparities. 

Much Remaining to Accomplish  

Changing MSP policies and supervisory practices may make significant differences in how MSP does its work, but it is highly likely that stubborn police culture will not be fully dislodged. Change needed in that regard may occur only when, as a society, we have a new vision for how we ensure public safety. That starts with acknowledgment that old police culture is perpetuated by officers who are trained to function in an old way – responding to every emergency as though a gun battle will break out at any minute. In truth, most emergencies don’t require an armed response (e.g., mental health crises, drug overdoses, noise complaints, squabbling neighbors, etc.), and the officers who respond are not qualified to address such problems effectively. 

If we want to break up the old police culture, let’s replace the personnel who perpetuate it with professionals who have no use for it. Law enforcement agencies should replace significant numbers of armed officers with social workers, psychologists, drug treatment specialists, mediators, and other professionals who will not only decline to buy into the idea that our communities are filled with enemies who must be dealt with by aggressive and forceful means, but who will also possess the credentials and training required to address real emergencies most effectively. 

Mark P. Fancher is the staff attorney for the ACLU of Michigan’s Racial Justice Project. 

As part of our Black History Month celebration, we reached out to do a Q&A with Bill Greene who, to the surprise of no one who knows him, easily made a transition from the private sector, where he was an auto company executive and business owner, to the nonprofit ACLU of Michigan, where he is our chief operating officer, keeping a close eye on the financial side of our statewide organization.

We start by asking him, when it comes to race, how he prefers to identify, and why. 

Q: Do you prefer the term Black, African American, or something else? 
A: I prefer Black. In part, that’s because of the activism that was occurring as I was coming of age, and the preference for using Black among the people pushing for much-needed social change. Also, when I was older, I had a white friend who was a naturalized American citizen originally from South Africa. When he asked, “Am I an African American?” I thought the answer had to be yes. So that shaped my thinking as well. Not all Black people living in America are from either here or Africa. There are Black people from the Caribbean, from South America, Central America. We are all part of the Black diaspora.  

Q: What were things like for you growing up in Louisiana during the 1970s? 
A: Racism was very prevalent at that time. As just one example, when my mother was a teenager, she worked in a restaurant that wouldn’t serve Black people. Another example was my father – who was a highly respected educator. He was passed over for an important job that went instead to a less-qualified white man. So, I was definitely aware of the racism that existed.

But I was very fortunate in that I grew up in an all-Black neighborhood in Plaisance, an unincorporated town near Opelousas, where a number of Black professionals started building homes for Black people to live in at a time when they were being redlined elsewhere. I was incredibly lucky to have grown up surrounded by so many positive role models in a community where people all helped and supported each other. Looking back, I can really appreciate now how important those things are. 

I was also very fortunate to have grown up in a family that placed an extremely high value on education. My mother, father, and all their siblings had college degrees. One of my grandfathers was a Baptist minister, so religion also played a central role in our lives.  

As a result of all that, I grew up believing there was nothing I couldn’t accomplish.  

Q: How old were you when you came out as being gay? 
A: I was 27, even though I knew I was gay for as far back as I remember – from the time I first became self-aware. But it was not a big factor in how I lived my life. I was captain of my football team. I was prom king. I didn’t feel like I was closeting myself. It was just that I never felt a strong need to date anyone, or to have a romantic relationship. 

It was the same when I went away to college. I had my books. I had sports, especially tennis. And I had my church. I was content with that. 

Q: What changed? 
A: The person who is now my partner asked me out on a date. And I thought that, if I was going to be in a same-sex relationship, that it was important for me to come out, so that no one would think I was hiding anything. The first people I told were my brother and my mother. Both said they were not surprised at all, that they both always thought I was gay. 

Q: How did you reconcile issues with the church? 
A: I found a church that was more accepting of people like me, and moved on. But I can also say, on a positive note, that I noticed a real change in attitude among a lot of Black churchgoers after Barack Obama became president. His open embrace of the LGBTQ + community, I think that opened a lot of eyes, and hearts. 

Q: Many of us on staff have noticed that when we go out with you either for a work event or dinner, you always run into people who know you, and greet you with enthusiasm. You seem to know everyone! What do you attribute that to?  
A: My father. He was a very outgoing person. He also taught me an extremely valuable lesson, which is that it is important to treat everyone exactly the same, whether it is an executive heading a massive corporation or the person who sweeps the floors at night. Whoever it is, they respond to being treated with respect, and really appreciate it when someone takes a real interest in who they are as a person. 

Q: Along with working at non-profits, you have a lot of experience in the corporate world as well, both with Ford, and as the owner of a consulting business you started.  What is the difference? 
A: Corporations exist to maximize profits for shareholders. That’s the bottom line. But at a nonprofit organization like the ACLU, I think of the people and communities we serve as our shareholders. Instead of increased profits, we exist to help improve their lives, and the communities they live in. 

Q: Is there any work the organization has done that stands out for you? 
A: I think all the work we do is extremely important. From our work reforming the criminal legal system – including our groundbreaking work to address the problems caused by cash bail – to years of work protecting and expanding the rights of LGBTQ+ people, we’ve been able to accomplish so much.  

But there are a couple of issues that really stand out to me as having made a really significant impact. One is the work we did in Flint around the water crisis there. We played a pivotal role in bringing that problem to light, then filed lawsuits that resulted in the replacement of all the lead water lines in the city of nearly 100,000 people. Another lawsuit resulted in the provision of much-needed special education resources for the children harmed by exposure to lead that was in their water. 

A while back, I was at a grocery store in Detroit when an older Black man approached and asked, “Young man, what do you do for a living?” When I shared that I worked for the ACLU, he said: “Is it OK if I hug you? You are doing God’s work in Flint.” His gratitude really touched me. You don’t get that kind of appreciation and satisfaction in the private sector. 

Another case that had a major impact involved Detroit homeowners, who were losing their homes in massive numbers as a result of their inability to pay taxes that should have never been assessed in the first place. Thousands of families were able to regain ownership and stay in their homes as a result of the lawsuit we filed. 

It is very fulfilling to be a part of an organization that can have such a positive impact on the lives of so many people all across Michigan. 

Q: I’d say it is safe to say, though, that our organization isn’t necessarily loved universally… 
A: (laughing) Yeah, that is definitely true. I had an ACLU T-shirt on once and a guy looked right at me and said, "You assholes are destroying our country!" But it is easy to shrug off that kind of unfounded criticism. The point of our work is that it’s always important, and it is deeply appreciated by those who feel their voices are marginalized. 

Q: Do you have any books you would recommend people read during Black History Month? 
A: Yes. Chains and Images of Psychological Slavery, a 1984 book by clinical psychologist Naʾim Akbar. It was given to me by a friend, a nephew of Louis Farrakhan, while we were both students at Grambling. It really brought to light all the racist images, and the daily depictions of structural racism that exist, and the psychological toll it takes on Black people, and how to break free of that. 

Q: What music is in heavy rotation on your playlist these days? 
A: I’m a big fan of female jazz vocalists. I listen to Sarah Vaughan a lot, and Nina Simone, who I greatly admire, not just for her immense talent but also, beginning in the 1960s, how she used her music and her stature to fight for civil rights. But I’m mostly all over the place with my music. For example, I really like Buffalo Springfield, and that style of folk-rock David Crosby, Neil Young and others began making in the 1960s.  

Q: Do you have a motto or favorite saying? 
A: When I’m asked that, I usually think of the phrase, “Always look on the bright side of life.” But the important context is that, for me, those words are indelibly linked to a scene from Monty Python’s The Life of Brian, where the title character attaches that phrase to a cheerful tune he sings while being crucified. It’s kind of twisted, but that’s my sense of humor.