88 unread replies.88 replies.
88 unread replies.88 replies.
This week we explore the intersection of policing, privacy, and technology. For one debated context, consider the normalization and use of facial recognition technology. Here’s a report when San Francisco voted to ban government use of facial recognition technology in a Wired storyLinks to an external site., or if you prefer, here is the CBS News video segmentLinks to an external site. featuring an interview with Washington Post journalist Drew Harwell. In January 2020, California followed local government by enacting a 3-year moratorium on the use of facial recognition technologyLinks to an external site. in police body cameras statewide, which has now expired. However, there is a proposed bill in 2023 (A.B. 642) authorizing the use of face recognition across California, despite local government objections. Some organizations have opposed its’ passage, like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (Tsukayama, April 21, 2023 hereLinks to an external site.). For other evaluation of concerns about use of facial recognition in policing by the Brookings Institution (presented to the American Bar Association), here is a link to Lee and Chin’s, “Police Surveillance and Facial Recognition: Why Data Privacy is Imperative for Communities of ColorLinks to an external site.” (April 12, 2022). Also at the intersection of policing, race, and this technology, Johnson and Johnson report for Scientific American, “Police Facial Recognition Technology Can’t Tell Black People Apart,”Links to an external site. (May 18, 2023). Still, according to the Pew Research Center, “The public is more likely to see facial recognition use by police as good, rather than bad for society”Links to an external site.(Rainie et al., March 17, 2022).
To learn more about what “face recognition technology” is and how it works, “street level surveillance,” and applications for law enforcement, check out the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)Links to an external site. site or the American Civil Liberties Union websiteLinks to an external site., which takes a more libertarian, individual right to privacy perspective. There’s overlap with last week’s lesson on “digital footprints” in investigations and identifying Capitol rioters by combining geolocation, tracking, and facial recognition in social media posts, making a the case in favor of this technology for policing by the National Conference of State Legislatures, but known drawbacks when it comes to racial profiling. Washington State enacted a comprehensive regulatory bill on facial recognitionLinks to an external site. applications, the “social ramifications” state actors should consider, and privacy.
And yet, when it comes to access to personal and private data by police, the Supreme Court has been more cautious. Here is a video clipLinks to an external site. from the PBS Newshour, which features analysis of an important U.S. Supreme Court case, Carpenter v. United States (138 S.Ct. 2206; 2018). The report considers arguments surrounding whether police need a warrant to obtain information from a third party cell phone company to get a suspect’s location data.
The final decision was split 5-4, with Chief Justice Roberts authoring the majority opinion that Timothy Carpenter’s 4th Amendment rights were, in fact, violated by the warrantless search. Prior to the ruling, government authorities could obtain cell phone location data by arguing it was necessary as part of an investigation. Here is a link to the Supreme Court decision, a summary, and the dissenting opinions from OyezLinks to an external site. (a free law project by Cornell University’s Legal Information Institute, which is also a great resource for your final papers).
That said, instead of getting a warrant, many government agencies have simply shifted to purchasing location data from “data brokers.”
PROMPT:
In light of our materials this week on privacy, search, and seizure in the digital age, how does regulating biometric data like facial recognition or access to personal cell phone data bring up a recurrent theme for cybercrime: that law has trouble keeping pace with advancements in technology, and the “traditional” tools of policing and investigations?
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
