Predatory Policing,Intersectional Subjection,and the Experiences of LGBTQ People of Color in New Orleans

Abstract

Much of the disparate outcomes experienced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other identities along the spectrum (LGBTQ+) people of color are directly linked to the practices of public actors and through institutional policies. This is perhaps no truer than for LGBTQ+ individuals of color in their interactions with police. This article argues that intersectional subjection fosters an environment prime for predatory policing and uses it as a framework to examine perceptions of predatory policing practices and its role in the exploitation of LGBTQ+ people of color in New Orleans. Research findings suggest that participants perceive predatory policing as part of the everyday practices of the New Orleans Police Department, where modes of power and social control tactics are regularly used to maintain systems of oppression. Ultimately, the goal of this project is to use the lived experience to explore the presence of predatory policing to understand how it has contributed to the marginalization of LGBTQ+ identifying individuals of color.

Keywords

policing LGBT intersectionality predatory policing intersectional subjection

While strides toward equity have been made, people of color, who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other identities along the spectrum (LGBTQ+), continue to experience disparities throughout the course of their life. Regrettably, many of the disparate outcomes experienced by LGBTQ+ people of color are directly linked to the behaviors and decisions of individual public actors and institutions. Local law enforcement agencies have specifically engaged in practices that have systematically worked to limit the mobility and freedom of those who are most marginalized. This scholarship is situated within a recognition that there is a need to examine the lived experiences of people at the intersection of race, gender, sexual identity, and class in order to understand how policing practices operate to perpetuate inequality and exploitation.

Thus, the purpose of this study is to explore the perceptions of people of color who also identify as LGBTQ+ and examine the context of predatory policing in the practices of the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD). Predatory policing is examined through the framework of intersectional subjection (modes of power, intersecting identities, and social control) to understand how these policing practices operate to marginalize LGBTQ+ people of color in New Orleans. To study these perspectives, Q methodology, a mixed-methods approach that maps “how individuals think about an event, issue, or topic of research interest” (Brown, Durning, and Selden 2008, 722) was employed. First, scholars conducted twenty-two interviews with participants to better understand the wide-ranging experiences people of color who identify as LGBTQ+ have had with the NOPD. Second, twenty-five participants ranked a set of statements in order to reveal perceptions of predatory policing embedded in their interactions with the NOPD. Data are interpreted through the theoretical framework, intersectional subjection, in order to examine the ways participants, perceive the use of social control tactics and modes of power to limit their social mobility. The pervasive perspectives that emerged from this study help to demonstrate how ubiquitous predatory policing practices are within the NOPD.

The authors first highlight the implicit association between crime, criminal proclivity, and identity as these associations shape the beliefs and behaviors of law enforcement. Second, the authors discuss the theoretical framework of intersectional subjection and its relationship to predatory policing. Third, the article uses the pervasive perspectives of LGBTQ+ people of color to better understand how predatory policing is manifested within the NOPD. The article concludes with an acknowledgment that structural change is necessary if trust is to be fostered and authentic engagement will occur between law enforcement officers and LGBTQ+ people of color in New Orleans. For people with marginalized and intersecting identities, interactions with law enforcement officials can be a matter of life or death. Thus, it is important to learn from the lived experiences of those directly affected by predatory policing.

Theories of Crime, Criminality, and the Policing of Identity

The legacy of policing in the United States has resulted in very divergent experiences for people of color and their White counterparts. Harmon (2009) argued “Police departments do not exist to promote civil rights. Instead, they exist to prevent crime, protect life, enforce law, and maintain order” (p. 8). Police agencies, with roots as slave patrols, have operated to actively thwart access to social and political freedom through incapacitation, fragmentation, and the criminalization of Black communities (Burton 2015; Gaynor 2018). Well documented are civil rights violations and a legacy of harassment and violence against marginalized communities by law enforcement (DOJ 2015; Mogul, Ritchie, and Whitlock 2011; Muhammad 2010). These violations are often grounded within social and political structures of identity, crime, and criminality. Historically, however, these structures are largely rooted in negative social constructions that target and criminalize Black, Indigenous, and other individuals with underrepresented identities as a tactic to preserve the mythical narrative of racial hierarchy (Mogul, Ritchie, and Whitlock 2011). Associations between criminality and identity extend beyond race and ethnicity, impacting people who identify as LGBTQ+ in much the same ways. Carbado (2016) argued

Marginalized groups are more vulnerable to police contact and violence because members of those groups have non-normative identities to which stereotypes of criminality and presumptions of disorder apply. Additionally, people with vulnerable identities are less likely to report instances of police abuse and less likely to be believed when they do (p. 18).

The association of identity and crime and/or deviance is used to justify tough on crime policy and narratives, sometimes leading to violent and/or deadly interactions by law enforcement officers (Gaynor 2018). People at the intersection of race, gender identity, and sexual orientation normally fare far worse.

Crimes explicitly associated with people and place have, over time, resulted in the development of numerous strategies designed to criminalize individuals and groups that are outside of White, male, affluent, and heterosexual norms (Crenshaw 1989). Subjugated communities often experience social control by means of coercion, containment, repression, surveillance, regulation, predation, discipline, and violence of state actors (Soss and Weaver 2017, 567). Consequently, there are an abundant number of policies and administrative decisions, all grounded within anti-LGBTQ+ ideology, that explicitly discriminate against people who identify along the LGBTQ+ spectrum. From sodomy to crimes against nature statutes, bathroom bills to bans on transgender identifying people serving in the military, and federal definitions of gender that align with biology, these policies were intentional in positioning personal identity for political and social control (Fadulu 2019).

Assumptions about criminality and sex work serve to deepen and legitimize discrimination for populations at the intersection of race, gender, class, and sexuality. In practice, these assumptions often shape the behaviors of administrators. The Department of Justice (DOJ), after investigating the NOPD, determined that officers subjected “individuals to differential treatment—based on a belief that characteristics such as race, ethnicity, national origin, sex, or religion signal a higher risk of criminality or unlawful activity” and engages in practices of “profiling” or “biased policing” (DOJ 2011, ix). The DOJ report illustrated the varying ways in which the association between identity and criminality leads to negative and disparate outcomes for individuals along the lines of racial, gender, class, and sexual identity.

In New Orleans, police disproportionately profiled, harassed, and arrested Black and transgender women, as well as disproportionately charged them under the Crimes Against Nature Solicitation (CANS) law, a felony offense requiring registration as a sex offender (Dewey and St. Germain 2015). Conversely, White women were charged with prostitution, a misdemeanor charge requiring little or no jail time and minimal economic sanctions. The disparate application of CANS, and subsequent sex offender registry, in this case, led Black and transgender women to be increasingly exposed to gender-based violence, including arrests and exclusion from employment, housing, family, and community life. Ultimately, discretionary policing practices, including the skewed application of CANS, resulted in these women being, almost exclusively, associated with sex work, similarly to the ways Black people are implicitly associated with crime (Dewey and St. Germain 2015). Further, these interactions have resulted in economic vulnerability and exploitation of Black transgender women.

The DOJ (2011) noted inclusion on the sex offender registry complicates efforts for women to become economically self-sufficient, by denying them the ability to secure jobs, housing, and obtain services at places such as publicly run emergency shelters. “Of the registrants convicted of solicitation of a crime against nature, 80 percent are African American, suggesting an element of racial bias as well” (DOJ 2011, x). For Black transgender women caught in the crosshairs of identity politics and the criminal legal system,¹ a felony conviction under CANS may operate to limit them to survival sex as an employment option as felony status has denied them access to many public amenities. Consequently, people with intersecting identities are cumulatively disadvantaged by policing practices that prey on vulnerable individuals.

Intersectional Subjection and the Context for Predatory Policing

Research independently focusing on the interactions between race (Fortner 2015; Headley and Wright 2020; Wilkins and Williams 2008; Wright and Headley 2020), gender (Ritchie 2012), LGBTQ+ identity (Mogul, Ritchie, and Whitlock 2011), transgender identity (Stanley and Smith 2015), and policing is expansive, yet few studies focus on the interactions of policing and race and gender and sexual orientation particularly, from the perspective of those directly impacted by predatory policing practices. Ritchie argued for “the need to interrogate the ways that gender, sexuality, race, and class collide with harsh penal policy and aggressive law enforcement” (quoted in Mogul, Ritchie, and Whitlock 2011, xviii). In her seminal work, Crenshaw (1989) asserted, “because the intersectional experience is greater than the sum of racism and sexism, any analysis that does not take intersectionality into account cannot sufficiently address the particular manner in which Black women are subordinated” (p. 140). Intersectionality acknowledges that examining issues from a single-axis framework distorts the experiences of people possessing multiple identities (Crenshaw 1989). Thus, understanding how race, gender, class, and sexual orientation interact with the criminal legal system and how these relationships can exploit individuals offer new insights for the existing body of knowledge.

Daum’s (2015) work begins to offer such understanding through an examination of the selective enforcement of solicitation laws on people who identify as transgender in New Orleans. Daum argued the processes of governmentality leaves trans-identifying individuals more vulnerable to state social control. In this regard, governmentality serves as a broader scheme of tactics used by state and nonstate institutions to “dispose and order populations, and to produce and reproduce subjects, their practices and beliefs, in relation to specific policy aims” (Bulter 2004, 52). Combined, intersectionality and governmentality, form intersectional subjection. Intersectional subjection “provides a useful lens for examining the processes of governmentality because it enhances our understanding of why certain populations are targeted for social control and how power imbalances are perpetuated over time” (Daum 2015, 565). Defined by three primary components: intersecting identities, modes of power, and social control (see Figure 1), intersectional subjection recognizes the strategies used to limit the mobility of individuals who are most likely to be marginalized based on not fitting into prescribed social norms.

Figure 1.

Conceptual framework—intersectional subjection. Source: Daum (2015).

Intersecting identities refers to the multiple primary and secondary dimensions of diversity that constitute a single individual. Primary dimensions represent characteristics more likely to be fixed (e.g., age, race, ethnicity, physical ability, gender identity, and sexual orientation), whereas secondary dimensions are malleable factors (e.g., religion, marital status, income, and geographic location) that can influence attitudes and behaviors (Riccucci 2002).

Being characterized by two or more marginalized intersecting identities increases the likelihood of harassment and oppressive behaviors by society at large, but law enforcement especially. The previous discussion on the disparate application of the CANS law in New Orleans exemplifies how racism, sexism, and cisnormativity intersect to shape law enforcement bias and discretion creating drastically different interactions for Black women.

The second component—modes of power—reflects the ways in which authority figures—police, prosecutors, judges, community members, etc.—are bestowed and exercise power to maintain control and “restrict the life of the population” (Daum 2015, 567). Capital wealth, racial privilege, citizenship, and heteronormativity are examples of governing systems used to regulate people and place. The DOJ determined that the NOPD engaged in differential treatment based on personal identifying characteristics. According to the DOJ (2011) report, the NOPD connects vulnerable social group membership with higher criminal proclivities than those in advantaged socials. Those who benefit from racial and capital privilege, who fall within normative conceptions of gender, and who identify in heteronormative ways, are less likely to experience discriminatory treatment when interacting with the NOPD. However, individuals whose identities fall outside these perceived norms are more likely to be associated with criminality which increases opportunities for discriminatory and exploitative police interactions (Carbado 2017).

Social control is the final component and refers to behaviors occurring at the individual level. Social control tactics enforce modes of power (i.e., systems of oppression) as discretion is used and typically applied to vulnerable groups. For example, public shaming, profiling, incarceration, deportation, discrimination, pretext stops, and “walking while trans” (a term commonly used to refer to the pervasive profiling of trans-identifying people) are all tactics police have at their disposal to restrict movement. Profiling can occur even while managing routine affairs (Daum 2015) as “Law enforcement officers regularly stop, harass, and demand identification from transgender women, regularly subject them to commands to disperse, and regularly arrest them for low-level offenses tied to suspicions of prostitution” (Carpenter and Barrett Marshall 2017, 6). In these interactions, the practices of law enforcement officials operate to limit the mobility of trans-identifying women and reinforce trans oppression.

Intersectional subjection, as a framework, offers a unique approach to understand discriminatory policing and its impact on individuals with multiple marginalized identities. This conceptual approach allows for increased awareness of the ways in which the multiple axes of identity impact oppression, particularly as it relates to the interactions LGBTQ+ people of color have with law enforcement.

Predatory Policing

The New Orleans DOJ report concluded that the NOPD exhibited unconstitutional and discriminatory policing practices specific to race, ethnicity, LGBT status, gender, and toward persons with limited English proficiency (DOJ 2011). These acts of discriminatory policing illuminate how police officers use discretion to impermissibly target residents. For example, police discretion is exhibited through their decisions on who to stop, search, or arrest based on one's personal characteristics (DOJ 2011). Predatory policing, as defined by Carbado (2017), is

the utilization of ordinary policing mechanisms, such as warrants, arrests, and citations not only to exploit the economic and social vulnerabilities of a group, but also to generate revenue for municipalities and police departments and to effectuate pay increases and promotions for police officers (p. 552).

Black people and other underrepresented groups are more likely to be surveilled when compared with their White counterparts given the implicit association of crime and violence with identity. The attention Black people receive for existing in public spaces (e.g., selling water, barbecuing at a park, walking through a store, and bird watching), has resulted in discriminatory treatment and is best exemplified by the social media sensations of Permit Patty, BBQ Becky, and Corner store Caroline—White women who called the police on Black people for innocuous acts in public spaces (Farzan 2018). When compounded with the authority of state-sanctioned power, such interactions are more likely to result in harassment, intimidation, incarceration, or death. The murders of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd are more recent examples of what happens when power and bias intersect.

Patriarchal systems of domination (i.e., modes of power) routinely subject women and gender-nonconforming people to brutality, physiological and psychological trauma, and threats of sexual assault and violence (e.g., social control tactics) (Burton 2015). Such violence is illustrated in Woods et al. (2013) who interviewed 220 transgender Latinas on their experiences with law enforcement in Los Angeles County. Of those interviewed, 22% reported incidents of sexual assault, 15% were assaulted by police in uniform, 11% by undercover officers, and 4% by sheriffs (Woods et al. 2013). Much of these incidents go without formal reporting as language barriers and the lack of legal documentation may preclude transgender Latinas from reporting abuse from law enforcement officers (Woods et al. 2013). Generally, those with marginalized identities are less likely to report police misconduct and are less likely to be believed when they do (Carbado 2016; Woods et al. 2013). This system protects those that perpetuate, rather than are the victims of, state violence.

The administrative authority afforded to law enforcement officers to indiscriminately use social control tactics is reinforced by normative standards of worth—Whiteness, heterosexuality, maleness, and affluence. People who fall outside narrow definitions of femininity and masculinity are at risk for being “Othered” and therefore, victimized. The organizational culture in law enforcement agencies has not demonstrated value for the experiences of people at the margins as evidenced by the DOJ investigations into police agencies in Ferguson (2015), Baltimore (2016), and Chicago (2017). The overarching theme across these reports is that police engage in identity-based discriminatory practices.

The legacy of predatory policing is, further, supported by a legal infrastructure (e.g., prosecutors, judges, and juries) that works collaboratively to convert police violence into justifiable force, uses qualified immunity as a barrier to sue police, and indemnifies law enforcement from accountability (Ralph 2020).

The NOPD has been specifically cited for discriminatory policing practices against LGBTQ+ people. An intersectional examination of perceptions of police discrimination in New Orleans and the substantiation of misconduct, through lived experience, offers a nuance that is rarely given to people with intersecting and marginalized identities. As previously mentioned, the CANS law disproportionately targeted Black transgender women. Illuminating their experiences is a useful way to understand how modes of power and social control specifically impact this group of people. Consequently, the ability to center the voices of LGBTQ+ people of color advances research that values the lived experience, in a way that rarely occurs.

In this study, the components of intersectional subjection—modes of power, social control, and intersecting identities—illuminate ways in which state authorities are able to selectively prey on people based on their identities. Intersectional subjection manifests itself differently across contexts and among those who are directly impacted. LGBTQ+ identity is not a monolith, so the ability to contextualize how discrimination is experienced by people with varying identities within and across public institutions is an important consideration for policy development and administrative decision-making. It is, thus, critically important to understand the nuance of societal and institutional practices that advance predatory policing and work to maintain intersectional subjection.

Methods

This study explores predatory policing practices to better understand the presence of intersectional subjection in interactions with the NOPD. The examination of perceptual data allows for a more inclusive understanding of the ways in which the NOPD engages in predatory policing and the impact of those policing practices on residents. As such, Q-methodology (Q) was used for data collection and analysis of resident perspectives.

An Overview of Q-Methodology

Q-methodology is a mixed “intensive methodology that maps how individuals think about an event, issue, or topic of research interest” (Brown, Durning, and Selden 2008, 722) enabling scholars to systematically and empirically understand subjective data gained through an individual's personal experiences. Q research “seeks to understand how individuals think about the research topic of interest” (Brown, Durning, and Selden 2008, 726) and takes an inductive approach “to promote a greater understanding of the meanings that humans attach to events or phenomena” (Riccucci 2010, 45). Consequently, Q facilitates the scientific collection and analysis of the perspectives of people of color who identify as LGBTQ+.

Participant Identification

Due to the intensive nature of Q, a small person sample is required. “The purpose is to study intensively the self-referent perspectives of particular individuals in order to understand the lawful nature of their behavior” (McKeown and Thomas 1988, 36). The sample of participants was selected to represent the breadth of viewpoints of LGBTQ+ residents of color (see Appendix A in the Supplemental Material). All study participants were eighteen years of age or older, identified as a person of color and LGBTQ+, and resided in New Orleans, LA.

Neither researcher had existing relationships in New Orleans, thus, the process for relationship building and organization identification required substantial time, prior to the start of the study. Scholars made two separate trips to New Orleans to identify and build relationships with key community leaders and partner organizations. Due to the nature of the project, researchers wanted to ensure that organizations advocating for participation and potential participants trusted the researchers as individuals and their research process. New Orleans is a heavily researched community, particularly after the levees broke during Hurricane Katrina. Consequently, residents, organizations, and key constituents are, at times, weary of researchers working in the city. These two relationship-building trips helped to assuage any skepticism that residents may have had. These trips also enabled the researchers to build and maintain relationships with several community-based organizations, all serving the population of residents for which this project is focused.

Researchers advertised the study through the placement of flyers at the varying offices of partner organizations, via Facebook, as well as distributing flyers at social spaces catering to LGBTQ+ people of color. Individuals contacted researchers directly (via phone, email, or text message) indicating their interest to participate. Additional participants were identified through snowball sampling, by way of recommendations through partner organizations or research participants. Snowball sampling is a “nonprobability approach to sampling design and inference in hard-to-reach, or equivalently, hidden populations” (Heckathorn 2011, 356). This sampling technique was most ideal for this study as it offered researchers access to the study population, without having existing connections to the community. In this regard, individuals shared their interview experience across their social networks and organizations shared the study with staff and clients, all resulting in the identification of additional research participants. Snowball sampling also afforded participants additional comfort in participating as someone they knew vouched for the project. There are, however, limitations to this sampling technique. The first is it is a nonprobability technique. Traditional statistical methods use probability sampling methods as they are the gold standard of research and best represent the population for which they draw (Sadler et al. 2010). While an important consideration, Q methodology does not seek to be generalizable to a population, but to a discourse, and thus this limitation does not negatively impact the study's approach. Second, the use of snowball sampling may have limited the researchers’ abilities in connecting with a wider group of people identifying as LGBTQ+ and a person of color, as some participants were identified through smaller networks. Advertising the study via Facebook helped to work against this limitation by connecting with individuals who were outside the networks of initial interviewees. As scholars did not have existing ties to the LGBTQ+ community in New Orleans, snowball sampling served as the most ideal approach to identify participants in both phases of this study. Participants in both phases received gift cards, in the same amount, as an incentive for participation.

The next section details the two-phased approach used for data collection and analysis processes that occurred in 2016 and 2017. The first phase entailed narrative interviews that highlighted the experiences LGBTQ+ people of color had with the NOPD and the development of the Q-sample for the second phase. Phase two included the Q-sort process, factor analysis, and factor interpretation. Six factors revealing participants’ pervasive perspectives were ultimately identified and are described in further detail below.

Data Collection & Analysis

Narrative Interviews

In the first phase, narrative interviews were conducted with twenty-two individuals. Narrative interviews allow participants to tell their story regarding a significant or impactful event in their life (Bauer 1996). The narrative interview technique is designed to “lead to a non-threatening formulation of the topic and preserves the informant's confidence and willingness to tell a story about significant events” (Bauer 1996, 6). Narrative interviews enabled scholars’ access to the breadth of experiences participants had in interactions with police. Both researchers participated in each of the narrative interviews. One researcher was responsible for sharing the research overview, protocol, answering questions about consent and confidentiality, confirming participants’ approval of interviews being audio recorded, collecting demographic information, and taking notes during the interview. The other researcher was responsible for leading the narrative interview.

Researchers asked participants to share your experiences with the New Orleans Police Department. Within this context, the authors were interested in learning more about the lived experiences associated with police interactions, rather than the number of occurrences people had overall. In accordance with the narrative interview method, interviewers did not ask any additional probing questions, nor did they interrupt the participants as they spoke. Interviewers did ask minor questions for clarification purposes only and made small verbal acknowledgments to indicate to the participant that they were actively listening. Interviews averaged between thirty and forty-five minutes and were audio-recorded. Two graduate research assistants transcribed anonymized interview audio files as interviews were completed. Researchers made no assumptions related to criminality or behavior as it related to engagement with local law enforcement. In this context, researchers understood that police interactions are wide-ranging; furthermore, theoretical and societal evidence suggest that many adults (particularly those with marginalized identities) have likely had some sort of interaction with local police officers—be it for seeking assistance or other benign reasons.

After narrative interviews, participants were given an open-ended demographic survey. Given the nature of this project and that identity, in its many forms, are fluid, researchers determined that an open-ended demographic survey—allowing interviewees to write the varying ways in which they identified—was best. Participants providing narrative interviews ranged in age from twenty-one to fifty-six years and resided in New Orleans between nine months and fifty-three years. Participants varied in their sexual orientation, identifying this aspect of their identity as queer, lesbian, gay, bisexual, nonheterosexual conformist, and straight. The gender identity of participants varied as well and included: female, genderqueer, woman, male, ciswoman, and genderfluid femme.

Q-Sample (Statements)

Conducting narrative interviews allowed researchers to build a naturalistic Q-sample—statements taken directly from respondent communication (in this case interviews). Q-samples are a set of statements that represent the larger discourse related to a given topic and serve as the primary data collection instrument in Q studies. It is unrealistic to ask participants to sort hundreds of statements stemming from narrative interviews, thus a sampling process of the full body of participant statements is needed to identify the final set of statements, the Q-sample.

Unlike survey questions, Q-statements may be interpreted in different ways by different sorters (Brown 1970); however, the statements should not provide too much excess meaning in order to avoid difficulty on the part of the researcher in distinguishing and comparing the resulting perspectives. The primary goal of statement selection is to ensure that they represent “the comprehensiveness of the larger process being modeled” (Brown 1993, 96). To best represent the variety of perspectives related to a study, twenty to sixty statements are recommended (Webler, Danielson, and Tuler 2009). Fewer statements may not allow the sorter to fully express their view and a larger number may be too time-consuming.

To create the final Q-sample, a structured technique was employed as a method for systematically classifying the interview transcripts. Using a structured inductive design, researchers independently coded interview transcripts—according to the three components of intersectional subjection—to identify statements for the Q-sample (see Table 1). The classification system stemmed from the intersectional subjection framework, where statements referencing an individual's intersecting identities—including but not limited to race, gender, sexual identity, class, and citizenship status—were coded as such. Statements that depicted the presence of a governing authority's systematic use of power, i.e., capital and wealth, race, citizenship, heteronormativity to restrict mobility and maintain control were coded as modes of power. Finally, statements related to individual-level tactics used by police officers, including the threat of incarceration, deportation, public shaming, detainment, verbal/physical harassment, and violence/threat of violence were coded as social control. An initial list of 201 statements was identified. Researchers only included statements in the final Q-sample that were independently coded identically by both researchers, were clear, concise, and representative of the larger body of discourse. This process protected against scholarly bias, provided quality assurance, and ensured high intercoder reliability. Ultimately, the final Q-sample consisted of forty-five verbatim statements (fifteen for each component of intersectional subjection).

Table 1.

Logic of the Q-Sample.

Statement no.	Q-sample	Intersectional subjection component
1.	The police officer asked me for my phone number and sex and said he would let me go.	Social control
2.	If it's a gay club, mostly for the Blacks, they will bum-rush us and treat us like suspects.	Social control
3.	He was soliciting and got picked up and had to give the officer “service.”	Social control
4.	Someone [a transgender woman] got robbed, I mean hit her with a gun, beat her, and everything. The police locked her up for disorderly conduct.	Social control
5.	The NOPD use their badges to make sure we don't have our rights or nothing.	Social control
6.	The person who calls the police, they [NOPD] don't show up on time anyway, or if they do, they’re just causing more stress and anxiety for people living in that community, being harassed, givin’ people an excuse to be messed with.	Social control
7.	I’ve heard of some people getting raped [by officers] while with their girlfriends, like one of my friend's [a queer woman], girlfriend got raped.	Social control
8.	That's why we avoid calling the police, because nine times out of ten when we call them, we’re getting arrested.	Social control
9.	Police bother her [transgender woman] all the time. Beautiful just like us, has everything, had herself put together nicely, but by the NOPD knowing that she is transgender, they call her a punk and faggot ass.	Social control
10.	Since you consider yourself a dude, bitch I’m going to handle you like a dude. (Police referring to a “stud.”)	Social control
11.	They [NOPD] talk crazy to transgender people. They say “you’re still a man” and stuff like that.	Social control
12.	Some police officers go beyond the badge and abuse their authority.	Social control
13.	I feel as if though we’re not safe. That's why we try to stay in our own community and stay together.	Social control
14.	I’m afraid of them. I’m afraid of police. I am. Like, not as worried about them killing me, just messing with me.	Social control
15.	Harassment happens a lot, like on the gay side of Bourbon Street when they feel like harassing people.	Social control
16.	NOPD makes people feel less than human. Their attitudes, their expression, their comments.	Modes of power
17.	Is there such a thing as police involvement when your community is being brutalized, harassed, arrested, discriminated against, not listened to?	Modes of power
18.	And if I miss court, fines. More money, more money, they jus’ find a way to stick you in their system to get money from you.	Modes of power
19.	Her car was impounded, it was like over $600 that she doesn't have … like they basically messed up her whole life.	Modes of power
20.	You’re going to see more Caucasians get a slap on the wrist, you know get a warning when opposed to us [Black people], we are going to jail.	Modes of power
21.	I’ve never seen a White person arrested for possession of marijuana.	Modes of power
22.	NOPD saw a trans girl and said “look at these men in wigs on Bourbon Street."	Modes of power
23.	If, you’re not noticeable, you’re better you know, you’re safer I should say. It's safer to be soft.	Modes of power
24.	Some women have their boxers (underwear) and stuff showing. You can't do that because you will be judged and the cops will stop you because you’re portraying a roll as a man.	Modes of power
25.	They [the NOPD] kept demanding to know where her papers were … they were telling her, her documentation like her license and stuff was fake.	Modes of power
26.	I noticed that there was never any kind of respect for pronouns or name or anything of that sort.	Modes of power
27.	It's like the system is designed to target young Black men.	Modes of power
28.	They [the NOPD] were telling her they were going have her deported, but she's a citizen and they were pretending they couldn't understand what she was saying, she has an accent, but you can totally understand her.	Modes of power
29.	She is someone who has some very traumatic stories of dealing with NOPD as someone who is perceived as an undocumented person, even though she is not.	Modes of power
30.	As a Black woman, as a queer Black woman, but primarily as a Black woman, I seem to get type casted here as a prostitute by the police.	Intersecting identities
31.	NOPDs treatment of me depends on if they treat me as someone who's from here with skin privilege or they treat me as a transplant with privilege. When they see me as a transplant with privilege, they treat me even better than when they think I’m from here.	Modes of power
32.	I have to acknowledge the privilege of being able to blend in as a feminine presenting person. As a Black fem presenting person I’m also hyper sexualized by the community and by society. The hypersexuality they assign me is also criminalized.	Intersecting identities
33.	I have seen White women walk around here in less (clothes) and never be harassed by cops not ever be stopped, not ever questioned.	Intersecting identities
34.	If you’re young and Black in the city of New Orleans you’re a suspect.	Intersecting identities
35.	I think I benefitted from my skin privilege and stuff because he let me go with a warning.	Intersecting identities
36.	I think that when people of color are easily “identifiable” as LGBTQ police interact with them a lot differently.	Intersecting identities
37.	I do believe there is a heightened magnitude of those areas [the French Quarter] that cater to the Black LGBT plus establishments.	Intersecting identities
38.	But a lotta LGBT women and men we don't believe in calling the cops because we’re scared we are going to get judged.	Intersecting identities
39.	Being a Black woman, I’m like naw I don't ever call the police. I’d rather like try to work it out before I call the police.	Intersecting identities
40.	A more masculine presenting partner (for lesbian couples) is the one getting the direct contact with the police.	Intersecting identities
41.	Folks that couldn't just speak the language, that couldn't provide the cop with information, so they just booked them on misinterpretation of name, age, and address.	Intersecting identities
42.	When people of color are easily “identifiable” as LGBTQ police interact with them a lot different, it’s in a negative light.	Intersecting identities
43.	I’m very fem presenting all the time, so I know that probably plays into some invisibility stuff. Maybe we were read as a heterosexual couple.	Intersecting identities
44.	Police on horses ride down the streets. Sometimes speaking in a rude manner but I do notice that there is more attention to gay areas that are populated with our community and population of people.	Intersecting identities
45.	… within the LGBTQ community and then of course adding that you’re a person of color, it just really makes things so much more difficult.	Intersecting identities

The Q-Sort

The fundamental basis of a Q study is the Q-sort. Within a Q-sort, the subject models their opinions by rank ordering the Q-sample (verbatim statements) along a continuum. Distribution markers are used to indicate each positive (+) and negative (−) score and the neutral (0) position. These markers reproduce the distribution continuum and assist the participant in card placement as they conduct the sort (see Figure 2). Participants are given a set of randomly numbered statements (Q-sample) that refer to the specific concept being examined. Participants are directed to sort the statements according to a condition of instruction. After each Q-sort, participants are asked to expound upon their placement of statements. Q-sorts are then factor analyzed using PQMethod to identify the underlying social perspectives (Webler, Danielson, and Tuler 2009). PQMethod is a dedicated Q methodological statistical program that allows Q researchers to enter data from Q-sorts (in the same way, these data are collected) and then factor analyzes the sorts using either the Centroid or principal component analysis (PCA) method to identify factors, i.e., the pervasive perspectives of research participants.

Figure 2.

Forced free distribution.

Twenty-five individuals performed Q-sorts in phase two. Of these, seven participated in both phases one and two. Researchers attempted to contact all phase one participants and invite them to participate in the second phase. However, given that phase two was conducted 1 year after the first phase, there were obstacles in connecting with some of the phase one participants. Some phase one participants indicated they had relocated, others had scheduling conflicts, others had changed contact information preventing contact, and still, others elected not to participate. This study and the subsequent use of Q are focused on illuminating participant perspectives. As such, the inclusion of some participants in both phases and others in just phase one or two does not limit the study's ability in identifying such perspectives. Further, there are no limitations in having participants sort a Q-sample that includes a statement they may have made. By design, the sorting process, as described below in detail, is prearranged “to delineate and further standardize the ranking procedure” (Watts and Stenner 2012, 16), so that each participant's rank order of the statements is held constant and compared against the other rankings (Watts and Stenner 2012).

Participants were given the Q-sample and using a scale of +4 (most likely) to −4 (least likely) were asked to think about experiences LGBTQ people of color have with the New Orleans Police Department and sort the statements according to how likely you believe they occur. Participants were limited to the number of statements they were able to place under each rank, forcing them to adhere to a normal-like distribution. Using a forced distribution format (see Figure 2) gives participants the freedom to place statements where they deem most appropriate but also forces them to make difficult decisions about the ranking value they assign to each statement, thus assigning individual meaning to their sort. The forced choice, standardized distribution “permits a fully commensurate and less ambiguous comparison of Q sorts, it provides data in a [more] convenient and readily processed form, and perhaps most importantly…the employment of a free distribution provides us with no additional information” (Watts and Stenner 2012, 78).

After each Q-sort, participants were asked to explain the extremes of their sort (+4 and −4). Data gathered from all Q-sorts were then entered into PQMethod, and through PCA, factors were extracted representing the pervasive social perspectives related to the project's focus (Webler, Danielson, and Tuler 2009). PCA was used as it produces the “mathematically best solution” while also allowing for the theoretical interpretation of factor extractions (Watts and Stenner 2012, 99).

Participants in phase two ranged in age from twenty-one to fifty-three years, residing in New Orleans between one month and fifty-three years. Phase two participants self-identified their sexual orientation as: pansexual, open, lesbian, gender nonconforming, bisexual, nonheterosexual conformist, queer, gay, transgender, straight, femme, and heterosexual. Participants identified their gender identity as transgender, two-spirited, male, queer/femme focused, transgender female/transwomen, female, and woman.

Results

In total, twenty-five sorts were intercorrelated and factor analyzed using PQMethod, resulting in eight factors. Two of the eight factors were removed from the analysis. One of these factors had an eigenvalue below 1.00. According to McKeown and Thomas (1988) “factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.00 are considered significant; those with eigenvalues of lesser magnitude are considered too weak to warrant serious attention” (p. 51). The second factor was not included in the analysis as there was no theoretical significance or unique perspective presented. Q methodology emphasizes both theoretical and statistical significance when determining the importance of factors (without sole reliance on statistical criteria) within the context of the research study (McKeown and Thomas 1988).

The analysis of Q-sorts uncovers the pervasive perspectives of participants as told by the ways in which the Q-sample was rank ordered (see Appendix B in the Supplemental Material). Each factor was interpreted by carefully examining the statements placed in the positive, negative, and neutral columns and within the context of the conceptual framework and related literature. This process resulted in six factors representing distinct, pervasive perspectives.

Factor 1. Harassment, Intimidation, and Exploitation: People not Place

Perspectives highlighted in this factor underscore the use of social control tactics by the NOPD specifically as they relate to aspects of predatory policing that include harassment, monitoring and spatial management, and intimidation. Participants indicated that these social control tactics were more likely to occur during repeated interactions with the NOPD and reported experiences of verbal harassment (or the threat of harassment), intimidation, and exploitation in police interactions. Interestingly, participants indicated that heightened attention, by police, is less likely to occur in areas or establishments catering to the Black LGBTQ+ community. This may be due to the limited presence of spaces catering to this community or an intentional hiding of these spaces from those outside the community. The result, however, is the direct targeting and exposure to social control tactics such as harassment, intimidation, and violence. Four of the five participants defining this factor self-identified as transgender women, suggesting that these tactics are perceived to more likely be perpetuated against Black transwomen. Overall, participants perceived that social control practices, including the abuse of power, were more likely to occur in ways that were demonstrative of predatory policing, specifically social control policing.

Ranked at +4 (most likely to occur), the following statements indicate perceptions that are archetypical interactions with the NOPD. Participants revealed

They [NOPD] talk crazy to transgender people. They say “you’re still a man” and stuff like that. (Statement No. 11)

and reference the abuse of power perpetrated by law enforcement officers that ultimately reduces a person's willingness to seek assistance from the NOPD.

The NOPD use their badges to make sure we don't have our rights or nothing. (Statement No. 5)

But a lotta LGBT women and men, we don't believe in calling the cops because we’re scared we are going to get judged. (Statement No. 38)

Participants, however, perceived that these interactions were not primarily linked with LGBTQ+ establishments catering to people of color as indicated by ranking the following least likely to occur (−4):

I do believe there is a heightened magnitude [of attention] of those areas [the French Quarter] that cater to the Black LGBT plus establishments. (Statement No. 37)

Additionally, participants perceived no privileges associated with their skin color. Participants revealed that they perceived the following statement as least likely to occur (−4):

I think I benefitted from my skin privilege and stuff because he let me go with a warning. (Statement No. 35)

Participants spoke specifically to interactions where the abuse of power and targeting of transwomen of color were evident. Kieara provided, “…transgender women of color…because of laws in the New Orleans, they’ll put you in jail for being a transgender woman. And they don't care. I could be driving to work or walking alone and they’ll think I’m a prostitute and will pull me over, check my bag, and if they see condoms in there, they will take me to jail. They automatically assume that LGBTQ women are bad, [that] they spread disease knowingly. They tend to harass transwomen when they are by themselves…” Kieara speaks directly to the notion of “walking while trans,” the profiling of trans-identifying women largely associated with quality of life policing and assumed prostitution violations. Kiera's experiences support Carbado’s (2017) argument for mass criminalization, in that mass criminalization “provides police officers with a kind of perpetual probable cause that they can use to justify arresting African Americans for a wide range of non-serious activities” (p. 554), thus making it easier to engage in predatory policing against Black people.

Phenix best articulated interactions representative of social control. “I’ve had experiences with the NOPD where I was, I was judged on how I looked. They didn't respect my pronouns, call me ‘he.’ There were instances where the officer got very rude and it was all kinds of different bullsh—that was going on. It was just like really just fu—ed up. I didn't like really understand it. It was my first time having an encounter with the NOPD and it was very, like, a post traumatic experience.” Carbado (2017) argued that a broader understanding of predatory policing is when “police officers prey on the vulnerability of particular individuals or groups as [a] form of social control” (p. 565). Phenix's lived experience underscores the predatory nature of the NOPD's policing practices.

The defining perspectives for this factor demonstrate how predatory policing is evidenced through the perceptions of social control tactics used by the NOPD.

Factor 2. Benefits of Racial Privilege

Participants loading highly on this factor convey the privilege associated with not having marginalized intersecting identities. Perspectives align racial privilege with the ways in which modes of power are used to benefit those whose identities fall along social norms. Thus, the policing practices of the NOPD are perceived to operate in ways that maintain power and privilege for those identifying in socially acceptable ways. These perspectives underscore the historical vulnerabilities that Black people experience as it relates to police violence (Carbado 2017). Daum (2015) argued, profiling enforces racial, gender, and sex hierarchies and maintains privilege and power for those identifying as cisgender, White, and heterosexual. The pervasive perspectives in this factor underscore these arguments and emphasized the various ways in which race operates to privilege some and burden others.

Statements ranked as likely to occur (+4) specifically relate to the benefits of one's proximity to Whiteness. When considering the likelihood of occurrence, participants perceived that being a White presenting person lessened the likelihood of exposure to predatory policing tactics. These views are underscored by the following statements:

You’re going to see more Caucasians get a slap on the wrist, you know get a warning when opposed to us [Black people], we are going to jail. (Statement No. 20)

NOPDs treatment of me depends on if they treat me as someone who's from here with skin privilege or they treat me as a transplant with privilege. When they see me as a transplant with privilege, they treat me even better than when they think I’m from here. (Statement No. 31)

I think I benefitted from my skin privilege and stuff because he let me go with a warning. (Statement No. 35)

The perspectives highlighted in this factor reinforce the argument that identity and modes of power are interrelated and play into the selective application of predatory policing on vulnerable populations. This is articulated in Amber's comments, “Whether you’re gay or straight, or trans or whatever, if you’re White or Caucasian it's more likely that you’re going to get a slap on the wrist as opposed to when you’re Black. And like whatever or not you’re LGBTQ, NOPD, if they perceive you to have cultural capital, if they perceive you to not be from here then for some reason it's in our psyche to treat people, tourists better…”

Present within this factor is the belief that there are benefits reserved for residents with proximity to Whiteness and White tourists that are not afforded to residents of color. Those without such proximity, and who have other marginalized identities, have an increased likelihood that they will be marginalized by society and approached by law enforcement and subject to harassment, violence, and/or criminal charges (Daum 2015, 563). Consequently, making them more prone to law enforcement interactions predicated on predatory policing.

Factor 3. Oppression Through Economic Exploitation and Sexual Violence

This factor highlights the oppression linked with race, gender, and economic status in police interactions. Wealth and racial privilege systematically operate as modes of power designed to restrict the mobility of LGBTQ+ identifying people of color. Modes of power reinforce systems of oppression that work collaboratively against people with multiple intersecting identities. Furthermore, the social control tactics of intimidation and the threat of violence and incarceration help to illustrate the connections between the hypersurveillance experienced by LGBTQ+ people of color in New Orleans and mass criminalization. Perceptions in this factor help illuminate how the NOPD use tactics of economic exploitation to cause additional burdens on an already vulnerable population. In this regard, statements ranked most likely to occur (+4) connected to modes of power related to economic oppression and uplifting heteronormative standards of gender presentation.

Her car was impounded, it was like over $600 that she doesn't have, like they basically messed up her whole life. (Statement No. 19)

I noticed that there was never any kind of respect for pronouns or name or anything of that sort. (Statement No. 26)

This factor also illuminates the presence of police sexual violence, or the threat of, when interacting with LGBTQ+ residents of color, advancing the notion that Black people who are also LGBTQ are more vulnerable to exploitation and sexual violence by police (Carbado 2017). Participants also indicated that the threat of sexual violence was more likely to occur by ranking the following +4:

The police officer asked me for my phone number and sex and said he would let me go. (Statement No. 1)

Participants explained that discriminatory experiences with the NOPD are, essentially, routine and exclusive to Black people in the city. Valerie said “…so many people have those stories…it's the Black experience in New Orleans. If you are gay, if you are Black you will be harassed by the police and you are always treated as if you are a suspect. So, the treatment is not one where I am servicing the community. It's more of I’m here to ensure I f— up your life.” Rahiem shared “I have never personally seen a White person be arrested for possession of marijuana. I specifically see that happen…specifically in the Quarter, they specifically target like Black boys.” The use of social control tactics to reinforce the systems of power—cis-normativity and economic and racial privilege—is perceived to be ingrained in the culture of the NOPD. This factor illuminates how one's economic status is exploited by police and the privileges associated with “fitting inside” of society's proverbial box. For people interested in living authentic lives beyond normative expectations of gender identity and expression, who are poor or working-class or are largely invisible by the broader society, law enforcement has been able to leverage modes of power to justify violence toward them through (the threat of) sexual violence and economic exploitation.

Factor 4. Standard Patterns and Practices

Social control tactics are perceived as routine practices of police conduct. These practices—the threat of incarceration, harassment, sexual violence, and quid pro quo policing—have resulted in perceptions symptomatic of a lack of trust, leading residents to be leery of engaging in interactions with law enforcement, even during emergency situations.

The person who calls the police, they [NOPD] don't show up on time anyway, or if they do, they’re just causing more stress and anxiety for people living in that community, being harassed, givin’ people an excuse to be messed with. (Statement No. 6)

Participants also revealed a quid pro quo approach to policing exhibited by NOPD officers. This relationship provides benefits to residents, only if they agree to provide sexual services at officers’ requests. Participants ranked the following statement as most likely to occur (+4):

The police asked me for my phone number and sex and said he would let me go. (Statement No. 1)

There is an underlying perception that community policing efforts are not practiced or NOPD are not officers genuinely interested in partnering with community residents. Thus, the perception that the following is most likely to occur (+4):

Is there such a thing as police involvement when your community is being brutalized, harassed, arrested, discriminated against, not listened to? (Statement No. 17)

Approaches to predatory policing that use social control strategies such as harassment and the threat of incarceration are perceived to be standard operating procedures for NOPD officers. Ultimately, these actions are used to uphold systemic tools that restrict the freedoms of LGBTQ+ people of color.

Factor 5. Exploitation, Public Shaming, Gender Nonconformity and the Threat of Violence

Daum (2015) argued that the profiling of transgender individuals operates as a tool that affixes privilege to binary gender identity categories. The prevalent perspective in this factor extends this argument to include lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer-identifying individuals, where these identities are associated with public shaming and the threat of violence. This is particularly true for individuals whose identity or presentation falls outside binary gender categories.

Since you consider yourself a dude, bi—h I’m going to handle you like a dude. (Police referring to a “stud”) (Statement No. 10)

NOPD saw a trans girl and said “look at these men in wigs on Bourbon Street.” (Statement No. 22)

Khadijah articulated that these examples are representative of “real life for me” as she ranked these statements as most likely to occur (+4).

Furthermore, the impact of economic exploitation through the use of fines and fees was perceived to most likely occur (+4).

And if I miss court, fines. More money, more money, they jus’ find a way to stick you in their system to get money from you. (Statement No. 18)

As marginalized identities (Black, transgender, gay, lesbian, immigrant, etc.) continue to be associated with crime and criminality, concerns for broader security and safety are justified by increased policing and profiling of these communities. Policing, in this regard, is reflective of monitoring behavior for low-level offenses such as jaywalking or sitting, or lying in public places (Carbado 2017). While these are nonviolent behaviors, predatory policing strategies use these activities to initiate engagement, which may escalate into more intense and adverse outcomes for those targeted persons. “Due to the fact that transgender individuals challenge existing gender norms, they are an affront to the state's authority to regulate identity and protect the public from fraud and security risks” (Daum 2015, 577). The perceived need to regulate identities that are socially determined security risks may be, perhaps, why the NOPD continues to engage in such practices and why these practices are perceived as most likely to occur.

Factor 6. Race and the Abuse of Power to Limit Rights

Abuses of power that restrict the rights of people of color are emblematic of interactions with the NOPD. This is characterized by the automatic suspicion and targeting of Black youth. Respondents ranked the following statements +4, most likely to occur:

If you’re young and Black in the city of New Orleans, you’re a suspect. (Statement No. 34)

You’re going to see more Caucasians get a slap on the wrist, you know get a warning, when opposed to us [[B]lack people], we are going to jail. (Statement No. 20)

Some police officers go beyond the badge and abuse their authority. (Statement No. 12)

Participants perceived that the NOPD restricts the life of LGBTQ+ identifying people of color through social control practices of public shaming, verbal and physical harassment, and the threat of incarceration. As Carbado (2016) noted predatory policing facilitates police violence, which manifests itself through the issuance of citations and all the intermittent engagements associated with determining the contexts which may justify an arrest. Subsequently, the differential treatment of White and Black people related to incarceration (e.g., bail, court costs, and other fees) reflects an economic system that advantages people with social and economic capital.

Discussion

This study illuminates the perceptions LGBTQ people of color have regarding their interactions with the NOPD. Research findings offer an increased understanding of how having intersecting and marginalized identities instigate harassment by law enforcement. Normative and hegemonic notions of status, privilege, identity, and wealth dictate the quality of life and life outcomes for people at the margins. This study extends existing knowledge on the ways intersectionality offers nuance in examining how the state (e.g., law enforcement, the carceral system, and the prison industrial complex) engages with vulnerable populations. Ritchie’s (2012) work focused on the experiences of Black women and their engagement with the carceral state. Mogul, Ritchie, and Whitlock (2011) exposed the myriad ways LGBTQ people are criminalized in the United States. Stanley and Smith (2015) spoke to the pervasiveness of state-sanctioned violence and its impact on transgender people in the United States. Within public administration, Johnson III (2018) edited a symposium focused specifically on the intersection of LGBT identity and youth homelessness. McCandless (2018) specifically addressed discrimination and how fearing police restrict how LGBT youth are able to access services. Naylor (2021) examined the challenges LGBTQ people face across a host of public institutions, including but not limited to: foster care, the military, and employment. Collectively, these studies elucidate the struggle vulnerable populations face to be afforded full citizenship rights.

This study centers on the lived experience of LGBTQ+ people of color who are directly impacted by state-sanctioned violence at the hands of law enforcement officers. In this way, it contributes to building a plentitude of narratives that highlight the experiences of LGBTQ+ people of color—those historically not afforded representation in dominant narratives and whose narratives are externally created and controlled. Media, politicians, judges, juries, prosecutors, and society-at-large have consistently supported police officer accounts of what happened, how it happened, and why it happened even when explicit video evidence shows otherwise. Rarely do LGBTQ+ people of color have the same visibility or receive similar deference, as their perspectives are often viewed as being an isolated incident, rather than an example of the patterns and practices of law enforcement engagement.

The factors arising from this research elucidate and contextualize how law enforcement uses social control and the ways the matrices of oppression inform and even cooperate to amass disadvantage for LGBTQ+ people of color. The experiences of transgender women are also highlighted in ways, that again, demonstrate the distinct differences in how they are (un)able to navigate society simply because of their gender identity. For people outside normative identity expectations, having marginalized intersecting identities positions them to be cumulatively burdened by discriminatory policing practices. Police bureaucracies support an organizational culture that allows predatory policing to not only exist, but thrive; as the administration of punishment is one of the unwavering responsibilities of many government entities. In the United States, the criminal legal system is deeply hostile and discriminatory against people of color and persons with multiple marginalized identities.

In A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey, Grant et al. (2011) found “people of color in general fare worse than White participants across the board, with African American transgender respondents faring far worse than all others in most areas examined” (p. 2). This report also revealed respondents of color reported higher rates of harassment by the police, physical and sexual assault in prisons, and are uncomfortable seeking police assistance (Grant et al. 2011). Law enforcement, thus, becomes the lynchpin used to reinforce practices that are antithetical to the oath of duty, which is to “protect and serve.” These realities contribute to the erosion of the administrative state and deepen distrust between vulnerable populations and public actors.

Soss and Weaver (2017) argued

Police institutions hold near-monopoly control over issues of crime management and public safety in America and, among other public bureaucracies, they enjoy comparatively generous budgetary support and insulation from oversight. On the street, police officers exercise a level of personal discretion that is rare in the bureaucratic world, both in its scope, and in its extension to the violent taking of life (p. 574).

Only the most heinous law enforcement agencies warranted a DOJ investigation. Unfortunately, the DOJ, and under Trump's guidance, stopped investigations into local law enforcement agencies, citing local control and accountability (Supporting 2017). Therefore, there remains the possibility for a larger number of law enforcement agencies to stay under the radar, as they violate the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens.

Police officer discretion and their differentiated use were, most recently, evident throughout the summer of 2020. In response to law enforcement’s killing of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd, protestors took to the streets in cities across the globe to demand accountability. These calls for racial justice were met with unrelenting brutality. Amnesty International reported 125 separate incidents against people protesting racial injustice over an 11-day period (Wamsley 2020). Federal law enforcement agencies monitored Black Lives Matters protesters, used excessive force, and detained people in unmarked cars in demonstrations across the country (Samaha, Leopold, and Adams 2020).

Conversely, White armed protestors were treated with “kid gloves” after storming the Michigan state capitol building in response to the coronavirus stay-at-home order by Governor Whitmer in early April 2020 (Censky 2020). Similar antimask protests occurred across the country with law enforcement agencies practicing a level of restraint not afforded to those demanding racial justice. There was, perhaps, an even more muted response from federal law enforcement when insurrectionists stormed the U.S. Capitol building on January 6, 2021 (Jefferson 2021). The antimask protest in Michigan (and other states) and other domestic terror attacks by White supremacist groups in 2020 foreshadowed the storming of the Capitol. Yet, U.S. intelligence agencies did not take the threat of White violence with the same veracity as they had those peacefully protesting in support of Black lives.

Dual knowledge exists in marginalized communities—knowledge about how the state should operate based on written law versus how it actually operates as a lived experience—and offers a context and nuance that is delegitimized by mainstream society (Weaver, Prowse, and Piston 2019). Similar to the experiences of racial justice protesters, LGBTQ+ people of color find themselves pushing against normative discussions with threats of violence that deny their humanity and ignore their rights. Moreover, it is telling that White people can be armed, inflict harm—if not kill—officers or bystanders and still be taken alive (e.g., Kyle Rittenhouse, Dylan Roof, Steven Carrillo, Nicholas Arnold Shock, Benjamin Murdy, and Robert Aaron Long), whereas unarmed Black people are killed immediately upon police interaction (e.g., Atatiana Jefferson, Tamir Rice, and Botham Jean).

Accountability is needed beyond litigation procedures or settlement payouts, particularly as large payouts to victims do not represent accountability for the organization, as funds originate from either tax dollars or insurance companies (Schwartz 2014). Rarely are payouts linked with organizational budgets, which, as a consequence, remain bloated.

This reality has resulted in larger movements to “defund” the police, which argues the reallocation of some police funds to social services (e.g., mental health, homelessness, and addiction) (Ray 2020). Law enforcement must be required to learn from the lived experiences of the people and communities at the margins, if trust, confidence, and equity are ever to manifest. Law enforcement policy needs to be informed, developed, and account for these lived experiences.

Conclusion

Predatory policing practices evolved from slave patrols, where “policing and the order-maintenance imperative developed in the slave holding states out of the need to curtail [B]lack mobility, punish minor affronts to [W]hite supremacy, and guard against the ever-present threat of [B]lack insurrection” (Burton 2015, 42). Burton (2015) further stated

The policing of slaves was a powerful symbolic force in the constitution of racial meanings. It signaled to [W]hites that, whether or not they profited directly from slavery, the defense of [W]hite supremacy and the regulation of [B]lack mobility was their civic obligation. Whiteness, and [W]hite masculinity in particular, became tied to the capacity to control and enact violence upon [B]lack bodies. The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 helped to formalize the relation by penalizing [W]hites that failed to capture and return escaped slaves (p. 43).

By contrast, the reward for engaging in the capture and return of enslaved persons was financial incentive or even higher-ranking status in the militia. The economic incentives to target, contain, and destroy Black people have long been part of the fabric of U.S. society. Today, the practices of “stop and frisk” and “walking while trans” are less visible to dominant society, but the outcomes are the same—the imposition of biased tactics that oppress marginalized people. To this end, predatory policing is a function of capital accumulation by the state apparatus in diverse and sophisticated ways.

Research findings underscore the existence of a two-tiered legal system that has allowed the negative social constructions of LGBTQ+ individuals to be systematically integrated into policing practices. LGBTQ+ people of color are marginalized solely based on normative assumptions of identity and criminality. Study participants highlighted the various ways in which predatory policing is standard practice for the NOPD and its officers. Modes of power operate to limit people, LGBTQ+ individuals of color specifically, from living authentic lives and being fully accepted into society. The pervasive perspectives presented in this article suggest that policies and practices must begin to be responsive to the diversity that exists within society. Therefore, there is a need to dismantle the existing criminal legal system.

While deconstructing a large and complex bureaucracy such as law enforcement is no small undertaking, the authors underscore several strategies to move in the direction of responsiveness to eradicate long-standing discriminatory practices and build trust. At an individual level:

Recognize the relationship between personal bias and professional responsibilities—unchecked bias will impact engagement with diverse constituents.

Learn to listen and be willing to appreciate (and value) the lived experiences of people in the community.

Take responsibility for developing the knowledge and skills necessary to modify attitudes and behaviors toward people with vulnerable and marginalized identities—be willing to take ownership of one's own thoughts, emotions, and actions.

At an institutional level:

Evaluate organizational policies and protocols (formal and informal) to assess where discrimination and inequity persist—both inside and outside of the organization.

Promote a culture of learning, which includes cultural understanding, conversations of race and privilege, and professional ethics and standards are a priority.

Conduct equity assessments, identify goals, develop metrics, and create an assessment plan to effectively measure change.

Implement and enforce accountability measures designed to incentivize ethical police work, while disincentivizing predatory policing.

Change policies that reward citations and revenue generation as a measure of “successful” policing.

Political and administrative leadership models and facilitates sustained organizational change. Unless drastic transformation occurs, the legitimacy of the administrative state at large and the role of law enforcement specifically will be tarnished.

Limitations

Researchers designed this study to illuminate the experiences of individuals pushed to the margins of society—people of color who identify as LGBTQ+. Due to this specific focus, the researchers did not offer insight into comparative group experiences of White LGBTQ+ individuals. It was important to drill down into the perceptions of people who are multiply burdened by their marginalized intersecting identities. Additionally, as the focus is on the perceptions of study participants, it is not clear whether their interactions with law enforcement officials were the result of organizational directives, administrative decisions, or individual officer discretion. Mainstream society often ignores and invalidates the lived experiences of vulnerable populations; thus, this project prioritized these experiences and perceptions.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-uar-10.1177_10780874211017289 - Supplemental material for Predatory Policing, Intersectional Subjection, and the Experiences of LGBTQ People of Color in New Orleans

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-uar-10.1177_10780874211017289 for Predatory Policing, Intersectional Subjection, and the Experiences of LGBTQ People of Color in New Orleans by Tia Sherèe Gaynor and Brandi Blessett in Urban Affairs Review

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

This project was supported by Award No. 2016-R2-CX-0046 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. DOJ. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication/program/exhibition are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the DOJ.

The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the research participants, partnering organizations, and the broader New Orleans community for opening up your city and trusting us throughout the research process.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. DOJ (grant number 2016-R2-CX-0046).

ORCID iD

Tia Sherèe Gaynor

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Notes

Author Biographies

Brandi Blessett is an associate professor and director of the Masters of Public Administration program at the University of Cincinnati. Her research focuses on administrative responsibility, disenfranchisement, and social equity. Specifically, she offers insight into the effects of institutional injustice and their implications for underrepresented communities. Dr. Blessett's research agenda advocates for ethical practices, professional standards, and accountability measures to promote equity, justice, and fairness to all factions of U.S. society.

Tia Sherèe Gaynor is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science and founding director of the Center for Truth, Racial Healing & Transformation at the University of Cincinnati. Her research focuses on the unjust experiences that individuals at the intersection of race, gender identity, and sexual orientation have when interacting with systemic racism and social hierarchy in public administration.

References

Bauer

Martin

. 1996. The Narrative Interview. London: London School of Economics and Political Science Methodological Institute.

Brown

Steven R

. 1970. “One the Use of Variance Designs in Q Methodology.” The Psychological Record 20 (2): 179–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03393928.

Brown

Steven R

. 1993. “A Primer on Q Methodology.” Operant Subjectivity 16: 91–138. https://doi.org/10.15133/j.os.1993.002.

Brown

Steven R.

Durning

Dan

Selden

Sally Coleman

. 2008. “Q Methodology.” In Handbook of Research Methods in Public Administration, edited by Yang

Kaifeng

Miller

Gerald J.

, 721–63. Public Administration and Public Policy series, Vol. 134. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Bulter

Judith

. 2004. Precarious Life. London: Verso.

Burton

Orisanmi

. 2015. “To Protect and Serve Whiteness.” North American Dialogue 18 (2): 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/nad.12032.

Carbado

Devon W

. 2016. “Blue-on-Black Violence: A Provisional Model of Some of the Causes.” Georgetown Law Journal 104: 1–46.

Carbado

Devon W

. 2017. “Predatory Policing.” University of Missouri Kansas City Law Review 85: 548–73.

Carpenter

Leonore F.

Barrett Marshall

. 2017. “Walking While Trans: Profiling of Transgender Women by Law Enforcement, and the Problem of Proof.” William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice 24 (1): 5–38. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1461&context=wmjowl.

10.

Censky

Abigail

. 2020. “Heavily Armed Protesters Gather Again At Michigan Capitol To Decry Stay-At-Home Order.” NPR, May 14. https://www.npr.org/2020/05/14/855918852/heavily-armed-protesters-gather-again-at-michigans-capitol-denouncing-home-order.

11.

Crenshaw

Kimberle

. 1989. “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics.” The University of Chicago Legal Forum 139: 139–67.

12.

Daum

Courtenay W

. 2015. “The War on Solicitation and Intersectional Subjection: Quality-of-Life Policing as a Tool to Control Transgender Populations.” New Political Science 37 (4): 562–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2015.1089030.

13.

Dewey

Susan

Tonia P.

. Germain . 2015. “Sex Workers/Sex Offenders: Exclusionary Criminal Justices Practices in New Orleans.” Feminist Criminology 10 (3): 211–43. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1557085114541141.

14.

DOJ (Department of Justice). 2011. “Investigation of the New Orleans Police Department.” Washington, DC. https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2011/03/17/nopd_report.pdf.

15.

DOJ (Department of Justice). 2015. “Investigation of the Ferguson Police Department.” Washington, DC. http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf.

16.

DOJ (Department of Justice). 2016. “Investigation of the Baltimore City Police Department.” Washington, DC. https://www.justice.gov/crt/file/883296/download.

17.

DOJ (Department of Justice). 2017. “Investigation of the Chicago Police Department.” Washington, DC. https://www.justice.gov/opa/file/925846/download.

18.

Fadulu

Lola

. 2019. “Trump’s Rollback of Transgender Rights Extends Through Entire Government.” New York Times . https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/06/us/politics/trump-transgender-rights.html.

19.

Farzan

Antonia Noori

. 2018. “BBQ Becky, Permit Patty and Cornerstore Caroline: Too ‘Cutesy’ for Those White Women Calling Police on Black People?” February 25, 2021. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/10/19/bbq-becky-permit-patty-and-cornerstore-caroline-too-cutesy-for-those-[W]hite-women-calling-cops-on-[B]lacks/.

20.

Fortner

Michael Javen

. 2015. Black Silent Majority. Boston: Harvard University Press.

21.

Gaynor

Tia Sherèe

. 2018. “Bias in the US Criminal Justice System.” In Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance, edited by Farazmand

Ali

, 1–5. New York: Springer.

22.

Grant

Jaime M.

Mottet

Lisa A.

Tanis

Justin

Harrison

Jack

Herman

Jody L.

Keisling

Mara

. 2011. Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey. Washington: National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

23.

Harmon

Rachel A

. 2009. “Promoting Civil Rights Through Proactive Policing Reform.” Stanford Law Review 62 (1): 1–70.

24.

Headley

Andrea M.

Wright

James E.

. 2020. “Is Representation Enough? Racial Disparities in Levels of Force and Arrests by Police.” Public Administration Review 80 (6): 1051–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13225.

25.

Heckathorn

Douglas D

. 2011. “Comment: Snowball Versus Respondent-Driven Sampling.” Sociological Methodology 41 (1): 355–66. https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1467-9531.2011.01244.x.

26.

Jefferson

Hakeem

. 2021. “Storming The U.S. Capitol Was About Maintaining White Power In America.” FiveThirtyEight, January 8. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/storming-the-u-s-capitol-was-about-maintaining-[W]hite-power-in-america/.

27.

Johnson III

Richard G

. 2018. “Public Administration’s Ethical Dilemma: Homeless LGBT Youth in the Twenty-First Century.” Public Integrity 20 (6): 539–630. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2017.1403228.

28.

McCandless

Sean

. 2018. “LGBT Homeless Youth and Policing.” Public Integrity 20 (6): 558–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2017.1402738.

29.

McKeown

Bruce F.

Thomas

Dan B.

. 1988. Q Methodology. Vol. 66. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

30.

Mogul

Joey L.

Ritchie

Andrea J.

Whitlock

Kay

. 2011. Queer (In)Justice: The Criminalization of LGBTQ People in the United States. Boston: Beacon Press.

31.

Muhammad

Khalil Gibran

. 2010. The Condemnation of Blackness. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

32.

Naylor

Lorenda A

. 2021. Social Equity and LGBTQ Rights: Dismantling Discrimination and Expanding Civil Rights. New York, NY: Routledge.

33.

Ralph

Lawrence

. 2020. The Torture Letters: Reckoning with Police Violence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

34.

Ray

Rashwan

. 2020. “What Does ‘Defund the Police’ Mean and Does it Have Merit?” Brookings, August 13. https://www-brookings-edu.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2020/06/19/what-does-defund-the-police-mean-and-does-it-have-merit/amp/.

35.

Riccucci

Norma M

. 2002. Managing Diversity in Public Sector Workforces. Boulder: Westview Press.

36.

Riccucci

Norma M

. 2010. Public Administration: Traditions of Inquiry and Philosophies of Knowledge. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

37.

Ritchie

Beth E

. 2012. Arrested Justice: Black Women, Violence, and America’s Prison Nation. New York: New York University Press.

38.

Sadler

Georgia Robins

Lee

Hau-Chen

Lim

Rod Seung-Hwan

Fullerton

Judith

. 2010. “Recruitment of Hard-to-Reach Population Subgroups via Adaptations of the Snowball Sampling Strategy.” Nursing & Health Sciences 12 (3): 369–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2018.2010.00541.x.

39.

Samaha

Author Albert

Leopold

Jason

Adams

Rosalind

. 2020. “We Received Documents Showing How the Feds Monitored BLM Protests. There Was Only One Mention of White Supremacist.” BuzzFeed News, April 2021.

40.

Schwartz

Joanna C

. 2014. “Police Indemnification.” New York University Law Review 89 (3): 885–1005.

41.

Soss

Joe

Weaver

Velsa

. 2017. “Police Are Our Government: Politics, Political Science, and the Policing of Race-Class Subjugated Communities.” Annual Review of Political Science 20: 565–91. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-060415-093825.

42.

Stanley

Eric A.

Smith

Nat

. (2011) 2015. Captive Genders: Transembodiment and the Prison Industrial Complex. 2nd ed. Oakland: AK Press.

43.

Supporting Federal, State, Local, and Tribal Law Enforcement . 2017. Office of the Attorney General . https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/954916/download.

44.

Wamsley

Laurel

. 2020. “Amnesty International Documents 125 Incidents of Police Violence Against Protesters.” NPR, August 13. https://www.npr.org/sections/live-updates-protests-for-racial-justice/2020/08/04/899084543/amnesty-international-documents-125-incidents-of-police-violence-against-protest.

45.

Watts

Simon

Stenner

Paul

. 2012. Doing Q Methodological Research: Theory, Method, and Interpretation. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

46.

Weaver

Vesla

Prowse

Gwen

Piston

Spencer

. 2019. “Too Much Knowledge, Too Little Power: An Assessment of Political Knowledge in Highly Policed Communities.” The Journal of Politics 81 (3): 1153–66. https://doi.org/10.1086/703538.

47.

Webler

Thomas

Danielson

Stentor

Tuler

Seth

. 2009. Using Q Method to Reveal Social Perspectives in Environmental Research. Greenfield: Social and Environmental Research Institute.

48.

Wilkins

Vicky M.

Williams

Brian N.

. 2008. “Black or Blue: Racial Profiling and Representative Bureaucracy.” Public Administration Review 68 (4): 654–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00905.x.

49.

Woods

Jordyn Blair

Galvan

Frank H.

Bazargan

Mohsen

Herman

Jody L.

Chen

Ying-Tung

. 2013. “Latina Transgender Women’s Interactions with Law Enforcement in Los Angeles County.” Policing 7 (4): 379–91. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/pat025.

50.

Wright

James E.

Headley

Andrea M.

. 2020. “Police Use of Force Interactions: Is Race Relevant or Gender Germane?” The American Review of Public Administration 50 (8): 851–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020919908.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB