This Literature Review is on post-9/11 policies in the United States that influenced the policing of communities of color. I used multiple scholarly articles to address the negative impact of 9/11 policies on minorities. Writing this Literature Review opened my eyes to more injustices within the system. I was able to inform myself about policies that are still intact today despite their controversy. 

Post-9/11: Policing in Communities of Color

Abstract 

            This paper examines the way Post-9/11 policies influenced the policing of communities of color in the United States. In this review, the goal is to address how the United States government allowed law enforcement agencies to unjustly police communities of color legally. The creation of the USA Patriot Act allowed the government to violate the constitutional rights of American citizens. Putting all the findings together should answer the question of how policies in the wake of 9/11 impacted communities of color.

Introduction

The attack on the Twin Towers on September 11th, 2001 shook the world. The terrorist attack was orchestrated by Al-Qaeda, a transnational extremist militant organization founded by Osama Bin Laden. Members of the group consist of Islamic extremists and Salafist jihadists. Many people feared for their safety after 9/11. In response to the fear, the United States government made a stance to declare War on Terror. The War on Terror was a global military campaign against terrorist organizations across the world. Countries apart from the United States also participated in the war against terror. During this time, the media acted as gasoline in the United States. Perpetuating stereotypes on what a terrorist looked like the Muslim community was most affected by this attack. According to Micheal Welch’s book Scapegoats of September 11th: Hate Crimes & State Crimes in the War on Terror thousands of people were detained within a few months of the September 11th attack. There were numerous cases where people held in detainment were deprived of food, strip-searched, and verbally accosted. This was made possible after the United States created the USA Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland security in the wake of 9/11. These policies made it possible for law enforcement to attack and police minorities without question.

The USA Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security

        After the September 11 attacks on the Twin Towers, the United States government adopted and amended policies surrounding security and law enforcement. The USA Patriot Act of 2001 played a huge role in expanding the power held by law enforcement agencies. Kam C. Wong’s journal The USA Patriot Act: A policy of Alienation states that the USA Patriot Act allows the government to “monitor, investigate, detain, and deport Muslims legally in the name of security, without rudimentary due process of the law and in gross violation of their rights.” Due process is meant to protect people from unfair treatment and unjust detainment. Police officers were permitted to police and detain members of any community without proper evidence. This made it easier for people who had biases against vulnerable minorities to abuse their power. The USA Patriot Act made it easier for people to operate unjustly under the law.

Along with the Patriot Act, in the wake of 9/11 the United States government created the Department of Homeland security (DHS). Robyn M. Rodriguez’s article (Dis)Unity and Diversity in Post-9/11 America states that “under the new DHS, the policing and enforcement functions of immigration authorities, both external and internal, were increased. (Rodriguez, 2008, p.381) Under the DHS, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the US immigration and customs enforcement (ICE) was established. The creation of the DHS spread fear amongst immigrant communities. Under the Patriot Act, the DHS was able to monitor these communities to figure out if any members were illegally staying in the country. They also played a role in the high rates of detainment. The DHS detained and deported thousands of Muslim immigrants believing they had a connection with an Islamic terrorist organization. With the USA Patriot Act, The DHS left communities of color vulnerable across the country.

Law Enforcement and Human Cost 

In the wake of September 11, law enforcement agencies were given a role to monitor citizens and obstruct any potential of terrorism through the USA Patriot Act. Racial/ ethnic profiling was a tool officers used to determine whether someone was a terrorist. Profiles included phenotypical features, religion, and outer garments. According to Andrea J. Ritchie and Joey L. Mogul’s  In the Shadows of the War on Terror: Persistent Police Brutality,descriptions that are given to police about suicide bombers include, “ “loose” clothing – which encompasses a wide range of culturally specific attire, having a “[p]ale face from recent shaving of beard,” – which necessarily requires having darker skin, to begin with, and “carrying heavy luggage, bag, or wearing a backpack” and “walking with deliberation but not running.”” (Ritchie & Mogul, 2008, p. 217) Vague descriptions were used to target communities of color– people who fit descriptions of a terrorist were arrested and detained. In correspondence communities that had higher demographics of people of color were under surveillance by local police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). In particular, Muslim communities faced constant harassment. They were regularly monitored for suspicious activity. Members of targeted communities found themselves questioning their place in the country. No laws were set in place to prevent racial and ethnic profiling. Officers and detainments went by unregulated during that year. In 2003, former President Bush released a set of guidelines titled Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement Agencies, these guidelines were against racial profiling. (ACLU, 2004, p.1) Nonetheless, since they were guidelines and not law– enforcement agencies were not obligated to abide by them. It was never dismantled and remained an institutional practice used by local law enforcement across the country.

The human cost of racial/ethnic profiling and the policing of communities post-9/11 is immeasurable. According to ACLU’s report on Sanctioned Bias: Racial Profiling since 9/11 people can find themselves “shackled hand and foot, held incommunicado in solitary confinement for months at a time.” (ACLU, 2004, p. 11) People with no connection to terrorism filled detention centers. The only thing that these people of color had in connection with terrorism is that they fitted the vague description handed to law enforcement officers. Post-9/11 a large number of people detained were Muslim or Middle Eastern. However, other minorities were equally affected by policy changes made in the wake of the September 11th. The descriptions given to police officers encompassed a large group of ethnicities and races. Any person of color who acted suspiciously was immediately targeted. The USA patriot act also allowed people of color in the United States to be searched without a warrant. In cities were racism appeared more blatantly, people of color were openly searched on streets. Officers were even permitted to search individual homes. Many women of color were targeted and sexually harassed by officers. No minority was left untouched by the USA Patriot Act.

Conclusion

The creation of the USA Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security increased the amount of policing in communities of color. Law enforcement agencies abused policies set in place to prevent terrorism and detained thousands of people. Most of the people detained had no connection to any terrorist organization. Law enforcement’s use of racial and ethnic profiling had an immeasurable human cost. People were detained for months in poor conditions. Communities of color were under constant surveillance. In the wake of 9/11, all minority communities were affected by legal policies created to obstruct and intercept terrorism. 

         The USA Patriot Act has been reauthorized multiple times since 9/11. Each time the act is reauthorized it is edited to encompass what is happening politically in the United States. Law enforcement is not without institutional bias, the number of black and brown inmates has risen since 9/11. The statistics that surround the imprisonment and of people of color have exposed the higher rates of incarceration. The creation of the backdoor— the USA patriot act— made it easier for police officers to target communities of color today. It allowed for unauthorized searches on the premise that there is some suspicion. According to ACLU’s article Surveillance Under the USA/Patriot Act, there is little to no judicial oversight on the powers given to law enforcement. The lack of regulation has made it possible for unjust arrests and searches. Minorities still find themselves vulnerable to the USA Patriot Act. 

References

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2019, February 6). Al-Qaeda. Retrieved May 10, 2020, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/al-Qaeda

Mogul, J. L., & Ritchie, A. J. (2008). In the Shadows of the War on Terror: Persistent Police Brutality and Abuse of People of Color in the United States. DePaul Journal for Social Justice, 1(2), 1–77. Retrieved from https://via.library.depaul.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1075&context=jsj

Racial Profiling Since 9/11 report. (2004, February). Retrieved April 27, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/report/racial-profiling-911-report

Rodriguez, R. (2008). (Dis)unity and Diversity in Post-9/11 America. Sociological Forum, 23(2), 379-389. Retrieved April 27, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/20110274

Surveillance Under the Patriot Act. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2020, from https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/privacy-and-surveillance/surveillance-under-patriot-act

Welch, M. (2006). Profiling and Detention in Post-9/11 America. In Scapegoats of September 11th: Hate Crimes & State Crimes in the War on Terror (pp. 77-101). Rutgers University Press. Retrieved April 27, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5hj5ch.9

Wong, K. C. (2006). The USA Patriot Act: A Policy of Alienation. Michigan Journal of Race and Law, 12, 1–43. Retrieved from https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1111&context=mjrl

This essay is about my Field Observation on #Beyhive on the twitter app. I followed and observed this hashtag to understand the social relationships and interactions of the Beyhive Twitter community. It was my first time conducting a field observation. Writing this essay taught me more about how online communities are a niche for people to communicate on a topic they hold dear to themselves.  

The Social Relationships and Behaviors of the Twitter Beyhive

Loyal fan base members will do anything to protect their idol. When idols have conflicts, their fan bases react equally. The Beyhive, Beyoncé Giselle Knowles-Carter’s fanbase has a strong reputation for being one of the most loyal and active fan bases across multiple social media platforms. The Beyhive’s members come from different age groups and ethnic backgrounds. Over the years, the Beyhive has gained attention for their behavior on social media. Members of the Beyhive have gone as far as to stalk pages and celebrities adding crude comments under posts as justice for Beyoncé.

Originally called the Beyontourage, the Beyhive has followed Beyoncé since the start of her career. The fanbase started when Beyoncé stepped into the limelight as a singer in Destiny’s child and evolved as Beyoncé became a solo artist. The origins of the term Beyhive are unclear, the term Beyontourage slowly faded the longer Beyoncé was a solo artist. As the internet became more accessible, the Beyhive grew. It expanded to multiple platforms and has a strong presence online.

I originally planned to observe a select Beyhive online group on Facebook but I needed permission from the page’s moderator to gain access. I ended up choosing to observe the Beyhive on Twitter. To gain access to the community, I used “#Beyhive” to scan through posts. The #Beyhive’s twitter interface follows the same white and blue aesthetic that is traditional to the social media network. Twitter functions like ‘reposting’ or commenting to keep conversations active in the community. The field site permits members of the community to post quotes, clips, gifs, information, statistics, and website links of Beyoncé related topics. Members of the Beyhive also share users through the platform. Oftentimes, when an account is it is because a member of the community has asked for help in reporting the account. Accounts that get reported have posted something negative about Beyoncé.

Like other communities, the Beyhive have a certain set of vocabulary and vernacular that they use to communicate with each other. The community uses a lot of hashtags– some examples are “#Beychella” and “#queenb”. These hashtags help circulate new and old content in the community. The term “#Beychella” originated from Beyoncé’s Coachella performance. The Beyhive uses the hashtag to show footage from the performance and film.  Other vernacular includes emojis. The most used emojis are the crown, bee, and lemon. The crown and bee emoji are often used simultaneously– as a pictorial representation of the term “Queen B”. The lemon emoji pertains to Beyoncé’s album Lemonade.

The Beyhive can be categorized into different sections. Like many artists, Beyoncé’s fanbase is composed of different types of members. A 2010 tumbler post titled, “Know Your Bees” by Lauren Agnew stated that the Beyhive tends to get clumped into a singular narrative of being a “hater-silencing group”. According to Agnew, the Beyhive is composed of digger bees, killer bees, Honeybees, and Yellowjackets (Agnew, 2010). The behaviors of the bees differ– Digger bees are members of the community that are journalists looking for information about Beyoncé. Honeybees are “peaceful” members that praise Beyoncé’s work and ignores critics. Killer bees are members that “attack”. And, Yellowjackets are members that are seasonal fans– oftentimes, they are looked down upon by other members of the community for their lack of consistency.

In the Beyhive, the community radiates positive and supportive energy. Members express appreciation when digger bees share information that isn’t widely known– these members will “retweet” posts to inform other members. Digger bees like @beyonceaccess help report news and information on Beyoncé almost daily. Newer members of the community rely on the information in the community to gain a better understanding and updates. Honey bees are usually the most supportive and are the largest observable group of the Twitter Beyhive. I observed a large number of honey bees who posted daily gifs of Beyoncé and quotes to the community. Killer bees seemed the quietest– there aren’t any large scandals circulating surrounding Beyoncé. Smaller groups of Killer bees are still reporting accounts like @beyyyhere. I did not see any yellow jackets.

The Beyhive gained a lot of online presence in 2016 after Beyoncé’s husband’s marital affair was exposed. Anyone linked to the affair was under scrutiny by the online community. Roy who was a subject of many rumors surrounding Jay-Z was bombarded with hate messages and bee emojis. Killer bees would comment on her Instagram page and Twitter.  Roy later made her accounts private. However, it did not stop members of the community who later moved on and commented on her daughter’s posts saying things like, “yo mom needs to drink bleach.” Killer bees feel like they are the protector of Beyoncé– all of the negative comments felt justifiable to them. Behaviors that wouldn’t be accepted outside of the screens were apparent during this period.  This issue surprised me. I have heard of members who have taken it too far but I wouldn’t have imagined that they would comment on Roy’s children’s posts. Even after the commotion around Becky quieted, Killer bees continued to look out for any posts that said anything negative toward Beyoncé. Their behavior was not limited to celebrities or personas, even smaller accounts, and less famous accounts were under scrutiny if they posted anything negative.

Current discussions in the Beyhive are surrounding the results of the “Top 10 Best Selling Artists of the Decade”. Beyoncé did not make an appearance on the list which has many of the online community members speculating the reasons why. Some are arguing that not enough fans were buying DVDs or streaming her music. More discussions include Digger bees telling fans when and where the live streaming parties are happening. So far, there have been streaming parties for Beyoncé’s old single “Halo” and for her “Homecoming” film, which Netflix released in 2019. Members of the community are also asking for others to vote for the “Beyhive Awards”. The awards have different categories ranging from “Best New account” to “Most problematic”. The discussion seems drier. I think it is because Beyoncé has not been very active this year.

Through music and other media, Beyoncé empowered people to become their best selves. Many members of the Beyhive developed deep and personal connections with the artist. These connections have led many people to feel like they need to protect her. The Beyhive lacks a singular narrative; members of the community are diverse in all forms of identity. I think that any social interactions and behaviors created and spread in the group are a reflection of the member’s cultures and subcultures.

Works Cited

Bereznak, A. (2016, June 3). Inside the BeyHive. Retrieved April 8, 2020, from https://www.theringer.com/2016/6/3/16042806/beyonce-beyhive-online-fan-forum-b7c7226ac16d

Chapin, A. (2016, April 30). The wrath of Beyoncé’s Beyhive: how fans have lost the plot. Retrieved April 8, 2020, from https://www.theguardian.com/music/2016/apr/30/beyonce-beyhive-fans-rachel-roy-lemonade

Hoffman, I. (2019, December 23). A-“Bey”-C: Learn The Lingo Of Beyoncé. Retrieved April 18, 2020, from https://www.dictionary.com/e/s/beyonce-vocab/#1

This essay is based on an interview I conducted in February about how culture affects views and experiences on issues. I interviewed Marc Spektor, an afro-Latinx man, about his experience and perspective on racism in predominantly white institutions. As a writer, I learned what it means to take a huge step back. The essay focused on another person’s narrative more than your own. I also learned how to take detailed notes during an interview. 

  Conversations surrounding Racism at Predominately White Universities

Racism is defined as prejudice and discrimination against a particular race or ethnicity by a racial group that believes itself to be superior. The United States has an extensive history and relationship to racism. Racism can be seen in daily life and has haunted communities of color for centuries. Universities across the United States have low diversity rates–composed of a majority white student body. Attending one of the few diverse universities in the country, I interviewed a student attending SUNY New Paltz– a predominantly white institution– to compare and contrast our experiences with racism while attending college. The interview was held over a video call. This paper examines how the racial demographic at SUNY New Paltz impacts Marc and compares and contrasts it with my experiences at CUNY City College.

 I chose to interview Marc Spektor, an eighteen-year-old man of color who is in his first year of college. He identifies as an Afro-Latinx–His father comes from Panamanian descent and his mother is African- American. During the interview, Marc wore casual clothes and looked worn out–his hair wasn’t combed like usual and he had dark circles under his eyes. As a man of color, Marc experiences the effects of racism in his daily life. Located in upstate New York, SUNY New Paltz is a public institution. Marc’s university is composed of a largely white student body, faculty, and staff. Like Marc, I identify as an Afro-Latinx and I am currently a first-year student at CUNY City College. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast Marc’s experiences with racism at his university and his perception of racism in universities across the states– to my perception and experiences as a student attending a diverse institution. 

During the interview, Marc tells me that he has heard of countless acts of racism and hate speech on his campus– some examples are Swastikas on bathroom doors and xenophobic comments. According to Marc, there was a rise of hate-crimes at SUNY New Paltz after the 2016 election. The results of the election generated a lot of hostility and fear on his campus. Marc has not experienced any racially motivated actions on his campus but tells me that he “would not be surprised” if he does at some point. While I haven’t heard of any racist actions or hate crimes on my campus, I did hear that after the 2016 election a lot of political science classes were having discussions on what could occur from the election. There was a widespread fear across my campus centered around what will happen after Trump gets inaugurated.

Marc spoke a lot about what needed to be set in place to provide a feeling of safety for students of color in the interview. He believes that teachers, faculty, staff, and students should undergo sensitivity training when discussing the concepts of identity and race– and highlighted the importance of representation. On his campus students of color feel as if they aren’t seen–Marc states that white students “aren’t interested in a lot of things communities of color have to offer and have to talk about”. He theorizes that it could be the reason for the racial divide on his campus. Like Marc, I also feel that my university is in need of more representation in its faculty and staff. Despite having a diverse student body, the body of faculty increasingly gets less diverse with time. Professors of color feel like they are not seen by their white coworkers and tend to search for other jobs where they are more heard.

Marc and I perceive the racism occurring in other institutions similarly. We were disappointed when we heard that students attending Colorado College posted themselves in blackface and faced no punishment. The college stated that the students could not be punished because they were exercising their first amendment right.  During the interview, Marc mentioned that “a lot of people like to use the first amendment for their hate speech and their blatant discrimination.” He believes that the first amendment should not protect these students and that they should be held accountable for their actions. Like Marc, I have heard a lot of cases where students and administration have used the first amendment to justify hate-speech. I similarly agree that this should not protect the students who commit such actions.

As a collective, Marc and I shared similar yet different experiences at our universities. Suny New Paltz’s demographic has an impact on Marc’s emotional safety. The lack of conversation on his campus motivates his desire for sensitivity training and representation. This assignment made me realize that even students who come from similar backgrounds can face completely different emotions on their respective campuses because of the racial demographic. For this reason, there has to be more diversity in universities, to allow students to feel heard, seen, and safe.

Sources

Miller, J. R. (2019, September 12). College won’t punish students for blackface photo, citing First Amendment. Retrieved February 20, 2020, from https://nypost.com/2019/09/12/college-wont-punish-students-for-blackface-photo-citing-first-amendment/