University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Rodriguez v. California Highway Patrol PN-CA-0012
Docket / Court C-99-20895-JF/EAI ( N.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Policing
Case Summary
On June 3, 1999, Plaintiffs, represented by ACLU, filed suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California against the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and the Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement ("BNE"), alleging a policy, pattern and practice of targeting ... read more >
On June 3, 1999, Plaintiffs, represented by ACLU, filed suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California against the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and the Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement ("BNE"), alleging a policy, pattern and practice of targeting African-Americans and Latinos in conducting stops, detentions, interrogations and searches of motorists as part of a federally financed drug interdiction program know as ``Operation Pipeline.'' The complaint was amended to include the California Branches of the NAACP, the California League of United Latin American Citizens as plaintiffs and to seek class action status.

Defendants moved to dismiss on the basis that plaintiffs lacked standing and that the amended complaint failed to state a claim. Defendants also moved motion to sever plaintiffs from the case and/or strike the class action allegations.

On March 13, 2000, The District Court (Judge Jeremy Fogel) denied defendants' motion to dismiss in part and granted it in part, holding that plaintiffs adequately pled violations of Title VI, the Fourth Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause. Plaintiffs' state law claims were, however, dismissed on sovereign immunity grounds. Judge Fogel denied defendants' motion to sever plaintiffs and/or strike the class action allegations. Rodriguez v. California Highway Patrol, 89 F.Supp.2d 1131 (N.D.Cal. 2000).

Thereafter the parties engaged in discovery. The docket notes that numerous discovery and procedural motions were filed and plaintiffs' complaint was amended a total of five times. Motions and briefs relative to class certification were filed under seal.

On September 9, 2002, the District Court ordered the action stayed pending continued mediation by the parties. A settlement was reached in February, 2003 and its terms and conditions were approved by the court, along with the accompanying class notification requirements. The District Court dismissed the case with prejudice on June 3, 2003.

The terms of the settlement included:

• A prohibition of racial profiling and racial discrimination of any kind by CHP officers;

• A ban on consent searches of vehicles through 2006;

• Comprehensive data collection for each traffic stop including race, the reason for the stop, whether a search was conducted and the legal basis for the search, and the result of the stop and search;

• Creation of an Auditor to assist in the implementation of changes addressed by the settlement agreement. The Auditor reviewed and analyzed data collected by CHP, and provided input on training, data collection and policy implementation. The Auditor's findings were reported directly to the CHP Commissioner.

• Creation of a "racial profiling" category of citizens' complaints.

Dan Dalton - 01/08/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Discrimination-basis
Race discrimination
General
Racial profiling
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) California Highway Patrol
Plaintiff Description All Latinos and African Americans who are presently and in the future will be stopped while driving by the CHP and then detained, interrogated, or subjected to a search (either of person or vehicle) on any public thoroughfare.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 2003 - 2006
Case Closing Year 2003
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Federal Enforcement of Police Reform
By: Stephen Rushin (University of Illinois College of Law, University of California, Berkeley - Jurisprudence and Social Policy Program )
Citation: 82 Fordham Law Review 3189 (2014)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Panopticism for Police: Structural Reform Bargaining and Police Regulation by Data-Driven Surveillance
By: Mary D. Fan (University of Washington)
Citation: Forthcoming, 87 Washington L. Rev. __ (2012).
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  What Happens When Police Are Forced to Reform?
Written: Nov. 13, 2015
By: Kimbriell Kelly, Sarah Childress and Steven Rich (Frontline/Post)
Citation: Washington Post (Nov. 13, 2015)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
C-99-20895-JF/EAI (N.D. Cal.) 06/12/2003
PN-CA-0012-9000.pdf | Detail
General Documents
First Amended Class Action Complaint for Declaratory Relief, Injunctive Relief and Damages; Demand for Jury 11/30/1999
PN-CA-0012-0001.pdf | Detail
ACLU and Coalition Groups File Suit Against CA Law Enforcement Agencies for Racial Profiling 11/30/1999
PN-CA-0012-0002.pdf | External Link | Detail
Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Dismiss, Denying Motion to Sever Plaintiffs and/or Strike Class Action Allegations and Denying Motion to Strike Portions of Pleading 03/13/2000 (89 F.Supp.2d 1131) (N.D. Cal.)
PN-CA-0012-0006.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Notice of Class Action Settlement 02/27/2003
PN-CA-0012-0003.pdf | Detail
CHP & ACLU Settle Three-Year Racial Profiling Dispute (Press Release) 02/27/2003
PN-CA-0012-0004.pdf | Detail
In Landmark Racial Profiling Settlement, California Highway Patrol Agrees To Major Reforms (Press Release) 02/27/2003
PN-CA-0012-0005.pdf | Detail
Judges Fogel, Jeremy D. (N.D. Cal.)
PN-CA-0012-0006 | PN-CA-0012-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Alexander, Michelle (California)
PN-CA-0012-0001 | PN-CA-0012-0002 | PN-CA-0012-0006 | PN-CA-0012-9000
Fox, Michael J. (Washington)
PN-CA-0012-0001
Schlosser, Alan Lawrence (California)
PN-CA-0012-0001 | PN-CA-0012-0003 | PN-CA-0012-0006 | PN-CA-0012-9000
Streeter, Jon B. (California)
PN-CA-0012-0001 | PN-CA-0012-0006 | PN-CA-0012-9000
Sullivan, Rebecca K. (California)
PN-CA-0012-0001 | PN-CA-0012-9000
Tigar, Jon Steven (California)
PN-CA-0012-0001 | PN-CA-0012-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Burton, Jocelyn (California)
PN-CA-0012-9000
Inan, Michelle (California)
PN-CA-0012-0006 | PN-CA-0012-9000
Lockyer, Bill (California)
PN-CA-0012-0006 | PN-CA-0012-9000
Modlin, Craig (California)
PN-CA-0012-9000
Pon, Tyler B. (California)
PN-CA-0012-0001 | PN-CA-0012-0006 | PN-CA-0012-9000
Shapiro, David W. (California)
PN-CA-0012-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -