Case: Sankofa v. Rose
4:21-cv-11468 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Filed Date: June 23, 2021
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
Case Summary
This is a case about the unlawful traffic stop of two African American residents of Detroit who were racially profiled and subject to an unreasonable search and seizure.
On June 23, 2021, two African American residents of Detroit filed this case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The plaintiffs sued four employees of the Michigan State Police under 42 USC § 1983. Represented by the ACLU Fund of Michigan, the plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief as well as attorneys fees. They claimed that their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights had been violated as a result of the defendants’ unlawful search and seizure and deprivation of equal protection.
The plaintiffs alleged in their complaint that they had been racially profiled when they were falsely accused of running a red light and detained for nearly two hours by Michigan State Police. During the time they were detained, the plaintiffs were asked if they had drugs in their possession and were subjected to searches. They brought the following claims:
- Violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments right against unlawful search and seizure
The plaintiffs argued that the defendants lacked any probable cause to stop them for a traffic violation and the search of their possessions was unwarranted. - Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection.
The plaintiffs argued that the defendants had profiled them based on race when they first stopped them for a traffic violation and then when they continued to search their possessions for drugs when there was no reason to suspect them of such possession. - Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection (right to train)
Lastly, the plaintiffs alleged that the director of Michigan State Police failed to take actions to prevent discriminatory practices by his subordinates that he was aware of.
On October 5, 2022, the parties stipulated to dismissal, and the court dismissed the case with prejudice. The lawsuit was settled after the Michigan State Police hired an independent expert to look into whether racial/ethnic disparities exist in the manner MSP conducts traffic stops. Michigan State Police agreed to have its traffic stop data investigated and analyzed by outside experts to determine why they disproportionately pull over people of color. The parties privately settled and agreed to let the court retain jurisdiction over the terms of their settlement agreement.
As of September 26, 2023, this case was closed.
In December 2023, independent experts released their report on whether racial/ethnic disparities occur during traffic enforcement encounters. This report revealed that Michigan State University (MSU) researchers found that African-American drivers experienced significant disparities during traffic stops by MSP. They found that this was not due to widespread discriminatory policing practices. However, researchers were able to identify specific traffic enforcement policies as well as program initiatives that may have contributed to the racial disparities. The report suggested 53 findings and provided related recommendations for the MSP on how they can reduce racial disparities in their traffic enforcement.
Summary Authors
Rhea Sharma (9/30/2023)
Renuka Wagh (1/1/2025)
People
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60006270/parties/sankofa-v-rose/
Leitman, Matthew Frederick (Michigan)
Chaney, Nakisha N. (Michigan)
Fancher, Mark P. (Michigan)
Korobkin, Daniel S. (Michigan)
Barranco, Kyla L. (Michigan)
Documents in the Clearinghouse
Resources
Docket
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60006270/sankofa-v-rose/
Last updated June 26, 2026, 5:51 a.m.
Case Details
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: June 23, 2021
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Two individuals residing in Detroit, Michigan.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Attorney Organizations:
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
State
Michigan
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Constitutional Clause(s):
Unreasonable search and seizure
Other Dockets:
Eastern District of Michigan 4:21-cv-11468
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed
Relief Granted:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Issues
General/Misc.:
Discrimination Area:
Discrimination Basis:
Affected Race(s):
Policing:
Case Summary of Sankofa v. Rose, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/44047/ (last updated 1/1/2025).