![\"California](\"https:\/\/wpdash.medianewsgroup.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/d7f7f0c5-6d94-4805-b897-e0f7efd6ba8b.png\")
<\/a>California Department of Justice<\/p>\nWhat does that mean?<\/p>\n
It means that, based on the county\u2019s demographics, White and Asian people were pulled over less often than you might otherwise expect. To wit:<\/p>\n
\u2013 36.7% of the population is White, while a slightly lower 35% of stops involved drivers perceived as White<\/p>\n
-24.3% of the population is Asian, while a dramatically lower 11% of stops involved drivers perceived as Asian<\/p>\n
On the perhaps-pernicious flip side:<\/p>\n
-34.3% of the population is Hispanic, while a much higher 44% of stops involved drivers perceived as Hispanic<\/p>\n
-2.3% of the population is Black, while a much higher 5% of stops involved drivers perceived as Black<\/p>\n
All told, there were nearly 214,000 traffic stops in Orange County in 2024, the most recent year of data from the state. Statewide, there were almost 5.1 million stops.<\/p>\n
O.C. was far from alone in having stops and demographics be out-of-whack. With very few exceptions, it was out-of-whack just about everywhere.<\/p>\n Perceptions<\/p>\n But what\u2019s up with this \u201cperceived\u201d race and ethnicity, you wonder?<\/p>\n California has set the noble (if elusive) goal of eliminating racial and identity profiling in law enforcement. So when an officer pulls over a car, it\u2019s not the actual race or ethnicity of the driver that matters; it\u2019s the officer\u2019s perception of the driver\u2019s race or ethnicity that matters.<\/p>\n \u201cThis distinction is important because racial and identity profiling occurs based, in part, on an officer\u2019s perception of an individual\u2019s race and identity,\u201d the report said.<\/p>\n To this end, officers must collect an impressive array of information every time they pull someone over\u00a0 \u2014 time, location, agency, reason, English fluency, race, ethnicity, age, gender, sexual orientation, disability status, housing status, duration, etc. \u2014 details that translate into more than 70 columns for each stop recorded in our groaning Excel spreadsheet.<\/p>\n Suffice to say many cops like gathering this data just as much as we like getting pulled over.<\/p>\n Police unions have said it\u2019s \u201cintellectually dishonest\u201d to compare stop rates to local demographic data because that glosses over the behaviors that lead to stops in the first place.<\/p>\n Many officers strongly dislike recording things like sexual orientation, race, housing status, etc. based on what they know are essentially guesses. They also bemoan the administrative burden of recording all that data, which takes time away from other policing endeavors. And, they argue, traffic stops can identify more serious crimes, so limiting them undermines public safety.<\/p>\n Objections duly noted. But Driving While Black and Driving While Brown have become almost laugh lines in those communities. Comparing demographic data to the perceived race of stopped drivers is not perfect, but the eggheads and statisticians and Ph.D.s who do this for a living believe that the information gives us a taste of what\u2019s happening out there, and many well-meaning folks are inclined to agree.<\/p>\n All that data is published in an annual compilation by California\u2019s Racial and Identity Profiling Advisory Board.<\/a> The picture is not exactly pretty.<\/p>\n \u2018At risk of racial profiling\u2019<\/p>\n \u201cCalifornia is the most diverse state in the nation,\u201d says the report. \u201cOver 67% of all Californians are people of color. California is also home to nearly 11 million immigrants \u2014 nearly 27% of our population, many of whom are people of color. In fact, diversity is central to California\u2019s values and is the source of our strength as a community\u2026.<\/p>\n \u201cThe concept that more than two-thirds of our state\u2019s citizens are at a heightened risk of racial profiling runs counter to the very fabric of what makes California great.\u201d<\/p>\n The 2024 data continues to show what previous reports have shown, specifically: \u201cthat racial and identity profiling in California remains a concern that must be addressed\u2026. continued disparities in the number and nature of stops for individuals perceived as Black, Native American, and Hispanic\u2026 and a very low rate of sustained complaints of racial and identity profiling.\u201d<\/p>\n Understanding what\u2019s happening is especially important in light of recent federal immigration enforcement actions, the report said. While racial and identity profiling is officially verboten in state and local law enforcement agencies, that\u2019s not the case for federal law enforcement. And we know how that\u2019s been going lately.<\/p>\n The report found that larger police departments tended to use force more often than smaller ones, and they had a higher percentage of stops that ended in arrest.<\/p>\n California Department of Justice\n<\/p>\n California Department of Justice\n<\/p>\n California Department of Justice\n<\/p>\n California Department of Justice\n<\/p>\n California Department of Justice\n<\/p>\n California Department of Justice\n<\/p>\n Show Caption<\/p>\n 1 of 6<\/p>\n California Department of Justice\n<\/p>\n<\/a>California Department of Justice<\/p>\n<\/a>California Department of Justice<\/p>\n<\/a>California Department of Justice<\/p>\n<\/a>Laguna Beach City Manager Shohreh Dupuis interacts with an officer during a traffic stop recorded on police body-worn camera footage made public on Thursday, April 6. (Screenshot of video courtesy of City of Laguna Beach)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n