Final answer:
Factors contributing to a Terry stop decision must be based on reasonable suspicion of crime, not racial profiling. The use of race as a sole factor for suspicion is an illegitimate and illegal practice, leading to an unlawful Terry stop and violation of Fourth Amendment rights.
Step-by-step explanation:
The decision regarding whether a suspect is subjected to an unlawful Terry stop should not be influenced by racial profiling, which is considered an illegitimate factor.
Under Terry v. Ohio, a police officer may stop a person if there is reasonable suspicion that a person has committed or is about to commit a crime and may frisk the suspect for weapons if there is a reasonable suspicion that the suspect is armed and dangerous.
However, stopping an individual based solely on race or ethnicity, as can occur with practices like "Driving While Brown," contravenes the Fourth Amendment which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Considering the latitude granted to police officers under Terry stops and heightened scrutiny—such as in Senate Bill 1070, which requires individuals suspected of being in the United States unlawfully to produce immigration documents—controversy arises.
Critics argue that the law may encourage racial profiling, leading to discriminatory practices and violations of rights.
Using race as a basis for suspicion without any other indicators of criminal activity is not a legitimate reason for a Terry stop and is considered illegal.
For a lawful Terry stop to occur, police must have more concrete reasons, such as specific behaviors or circumstances, that generate reasonable suspicion.
Skin color or ethnicity alone, as the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed, is not an adequate basis.
Pulling over or detaining individuals on this premise would constitute an unlawful Terry stop and a violation of constitutional rights.