No, the root problem is that a police officer decided to unconstitutionally stop a car with 3 African Americans, because they had committed the crime of being African American.
This discussion of the root problem is useful, but let's not let it become a red herring or distraction from the rest of the problem: I mean even if the stop happened and was legal, there is a real and valid problem in the way the trial occured, once she presented the proof of valid license and insurance, that should have been the end of it - including a reimbursement for expenses incurred.
I am curious about racial motivations and racial disparity though. It might be reasonable to think that the cop didn't pull over the people due to their race, as it was dark and I don't know if there was any way he could have seen that well. I wonder though if there is a way to find out a stops vs "run the license" ratio and if it indicates any racial biases. The run the license part should be gleanable from logs, but the number of stops part may be difficult - I don't know how those are recorded and how accurately they are recorded.
From the article (and the actual judgement the article links to)
> Absent a traffic violation, so far as can be gleaned from this record, the only visible attribute of Parker and her passengers that might have distinguished them from other motorists turning on Methodist Parkway was they are all African Americans. There simply is no other distinguishing thing that can be surmised.
No, the root problem is that a police officer decided to unconstitutionally stop a car with 3 African Americans, because they had committed the crime of being African American.