Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Law Enforcement and Corrections
University of Michigan Law School
- Keyword
-
- Police surveillance (2)
- 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1)
- Autonomous vehicles (1)
- Black Lives Matter (1)
- Body cameras (1)
-
- COINTELPRO (1)
- CalGang (1)
- Ceasefire program (1)
- City of Indianapolis v. Edmond (1)
- City of Tahlequah v. Bond (1)
- Civil liability (1)
- Civil police use of force lawsuits (1)
- Discriminatory policing patterns (1)
- Exclusionary rule to pretextual traffic stops (1)
- Gang Reporting Evaluation and Tracking (GREAT) system (1)
- Informer statutes (1)
- Mass incarceration (1)
- Objective reasonableness test (1)
- Officer-created jeopardy (1)
- Officer-created jeopardy liability loophole (1)
- Pretextual traffic stops (1)
- Probable cause and traffic stops (1)
- Racial profiling (1)
- Reasonable suspicion (1)
- Reimagining Police Surveillance: Protecting Activism and Ending Technologies of Oppression (1)
- Search and seizure (1)
- Search and seizure law (1)
- Self-driving vehicles (1)
- Semi-autonomous world (1)
- ShotSpotter surveillance technology (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Remarks, Andrea Dennis
Remarks, Andrea Dennis
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Over the course of one week, the Michigan Journal of Law Reform presented its annual Symposium, this year titled Reimagining Police Surveillance: Protecting Activism and Ending Technologies of Oppression. During this week, the Journal explored complicated questions surrounding the expansion of police surveillance technologies, including how police and federal agencies utilize their extensive resources to identify and surveil public protest, the ways in which technology employed by police is often flawed and disparately impacts people of color, and potential reforms of police surveillance technology. Before delving into these complicated questions, I presented remarks on the history of police surveillance …
Deprogramming Bias: Expanding The Exclusionary Rule To Pretextual Traffic Stop Using Data From Autonomous Vehicle And Drive-Assistance Technology, Joe Hillman
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
As autonomous vehicles become more commonplace and roads become safer, this new technology provides an opportunity for courts to reconsider the constitutional rationale of modern search and seizure law. The Supreme Court should allow drivers to use evidence of police officer conduct relative to their vehicle’s technological capabilities to argue that a traffic stop was pretextual, meaning they were stopped for reasons other than their supposed violation. Additionally, the Court should expand the exclusionary rule to forbid the use of evidence extracted after a pretextual stop. The Court should retain some exceptions to the expanded exclusionary rule, such as when …
Officer-Created Jeopardy And Reasonableness Reform: Rebuttable Presumption Of Unreasonableness Within 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Police Use Of Force Claims, Bryan Borodkin
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Note analyzes the current state of civil law surrounding police use of excessive force, highlighting the evolution of the “objective reasonableness” test employed in civil police use of force lawsuits brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This Note also discusses the role that social movements and surveillance technologies have played in furthering police accountability and shifting public opinion surrounding police use of force. After detailing this social and technological context, this Note addresses the numerous problems presented by the “objective reasonableness” test employed within civil police use of force cases, analyzing this problematic test from the perspective of both …
“Bang!”: Shotspotter Gunshot Detection Technology, Predictive Policing, And Measuring Terry’S Reach, Harvey Gee
“Bang!”: Shotspotter Gunshot Detection Technology, Predictive Policing, And Measuring Terry’S Reach, Harvey Gee
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
ShotSpotter technology is a rapid identification and response system used in ninety American cities that is designed to detect gunshots and dispatch police. ShotSpotter is one of many powerful surveillance tools used by local police departments to purportedly help fight crime, but they often do so at the expense of infringing upon privacy rights and civil liberties. This Article expands the conversation about ShotSpotter technology considerably by examining the adjacent Fourth Amendment issues emanating from its use. For example, law enforcement increasingly relies on ShotSpotter to create reasonable suspicion where it does not exist. In practice, the use of ShotSpotter …