yes but if profiling is based on common sense and crime statistics, it isn’t unreasonable. It is based in common sense reasoning.
zero tolerance policies (ie no profiling) is why tsa doesn’t bother muslim travelers but strip searches 5 year olds away from parents, and pat down nuns’ breasts, and removes grandpa’s artificial leg to check for explosives.
Profiling and searching people boarding a public aircraft in a secured area with tons of cameras is one thing.
Giving cops the authority to detain and search anyone in the street at will is a whole other animal.
It pretty much is Unreasonable, and should be considered so, in general.
Profiling is a distasteful tool which is ripe for abuse and should only be considered rarely, in extreme circumstances, say, maybe, for example, if one specific ideological group professes and/or acts on beliefs which are, say, antithetical to American Freedom, and advocate, say, turning the USA into an Islamic Caliphate via Acts of War.
You know, some Extreme Threat like that. War. Not simply for routine or arbitrary reasons to stop and frisk average Citizens.
For example, profiling blacks for stop and frisk just because blacks may commit a higher relative percentage of crimes in the area is absolutely not something that should be permitted. Indeed, it's unconstitutional, IMHO.
Used in that form againsy the average Citizen, such shenanigans would be smacked down by the Supreme Court, I would suppose. I imagine they already have.
If instead, however, it was used under the auspices of Wartime Policy, e.g. against a specific group disproportionately more likely to wage War against the United States and its People, i.e. Muslims, then the Supreme Court might look at it a little differently.
Such stunts must be pulled very sparingly. It couldn't be Constitutional to throw such tactics into everyday use against any broad swath of citizens. Any Patriot should oppose something like that instinctively.