Legal Definitions - selective enforcement

Selective enforcement refers to the practice where government officials, particularly law enforcement or regulatory bodies, apply laws or regulations inconsistently. This often involves exercising broad discretion to decide when and where to enforce certain rules, leading to individuals or groups being singled out for prosecution or punishment.

The core issue arises when this discretion is used improperly, meaning that individuals are targeted not because they have committed a violation, but because of who they are (e.g., a member of a protected group) or because they have exercised a constitutionally protected right (like free speech or assembly). While law enforcement and regulatory agencies inherently have some discretion in prioritizing their efforts, selective enforcement becomes problematic when it is based on discriminatory or retaliatory motives rather than legitimate public safety or policy concerns.

• Example 1: Traffic Stops Based on Appearance
  Imagine a small town where police officers frequently pull over drivers of older, less expensive cars for minor infractions like a broken taillight or slightly expired registration tags. However, they consistently overlook similar or even more serious violations committed by drivers of luxury vehicles or those who appear to be from a more affluent background. If this pattern of enforcement is shown to be based on the drivers' perceived socioeconomic status or ethnicity rather than a neutral application of traffic laws, it could be considered selective enforcement.

  This illustrates selective enforcement because law enforcement is applying traffic laws inconsistently, singling out individuals based on characteristics (perceived socioeconomic status or ethnicity) rather than an objective standard.

• Example 2: Business Permit Revocation for Political Speech
  A local restaurant owner is a vocal critic of the city's new zoning plan, frequently speaking out at public meetings and organizing protests. Shortly after a particularly critical public statement, the city's licensing department begins an intensive review of the restaurant's permits, ultimately revoking a key operating license for minor, long-standing violations that had previously been overlooked and are common among other local businesses. No other businesses are subjected to such a rigorous review or permit revocation for similar infractions.

  This demonstrates selective enforcement because the city appears to be targeting the restaurant owner for punishment (revoking a license) not due to the severity of the violations themselves, but in retaliation for the owner exercising their constitutional right to free speech and political expression.