Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Big Data And Predictive Reasonable Suspicion, Andrew Ferguson
Big Data And Predictive Reasonable Suspicion, Andrew Ferguson
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
The Fourth Amendment requires “reasonable suspicion” to seize a suspect. As a general matter, the suspicion derives from information a police officer observes or knows. It is individualized to a particular person at a particular place. Most reasonable suspicion cases involve police confronting unknown suspects engaged in observable suspicious activities. Essentially, the reasonable suspicion doctrine is based on “small data” – discrete facts involving limited information and little knowledge about the suspect.But what if this small data is replaced by “big data”? What if police can “know” about the suspect through new networked information sources? Or, what if predictive analytics …
The Pond Betwixt: Differences In The U.S.-Eu Data Protection/Safe Harbor Negotiation, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
The Pond Betwixt: Differences In The U.S.-Eu Data Protection/Safe Harbor Negotiation, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
Faculty Publications
This article analyzes the differing perspectives that animate US and EU conceptions of privacy in the context of data protection. It begins by briefly reviewing the two continental approaches to data protection and then explains how the two approaches arise in a context of disparate cultural traditions with respect to the role of law in society. In light of those disparities, Underpinning contemporary data protection regulation is the normative value that both US and EU societies place on personal privacy. Both cultures attribute modern privacy to the famous Warren-Brandeis article in 1890, outlining a "right to be let alone." But …
The Un-Territoriality Of Data, Jennifer Daskal
The Un-Territoriality Of Data, Jennifer Daskal
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
Territoriality looms large in our jurisprudence, particularly as it relates to the government’s authority to search and seize. Fourth Amendment rights turn on whether the search or seizure takes place territorially or extraterritorially; the government’s surveillance authorities depend on whether the target is located within the United States or without; and courts’ warrant jurisdiction extends, with limited exceptions, only to the borders’ edge. Yet the rise of electronic data challenges territoriality at its core. Territoriality, after all, depends on the ability to define the relevant “here” and “there,” and it presumes that the “here” and “there” have normative significance. The …
Corporate Avatars And The Erosion Of The Populist Fourth Amendment, Avidan Cover
Corporate Avatars And The Erosion Of The Populist Fourth Amendment, Avidan Cover
Faculty Publications
The current state of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence leaves it to technology corporations to challenge court orders, subpoenas, and requests by the government for individual users’ information. The third-party doctrine denies people a reasonable expectation of privacy in data they transmit through telecommunications and Internet service providers. Third-party corporations become, by default, the people’s corporate avatars. Corporate avatars, however, do a poor job of representing individuals’ interests. Moreover, vesting the Fourth Amendment’s government-oversight functions in corporations fails to cohere with the Bill of Rights’ populist history and the Framers’ distrust of corporations.
This article examines how the third-party doctrine proves unsupportable …
Reasonable Expectations Of Privacy Settings: Social Media And The Stored Communications Act, David Thaw, Christopher Borchert, Fernando Pinguelo
Reasonable Expectations Of Privacy Settings: Social Media And The Stored Communications Act, David Thaw, Christopher Borchert, Fernando Pinguelo
Articles
In 1986, Congress passed the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”) to provide additional protections for individuals’ private communications content held in electronic storage by third parties. Acting out of direct concern for the implications of the Third-Party Records Doctrine — a judicially created doctrine that generally eliminates Fourth Amendment protections for information entrusted to third parties — Congress sought to tailor the SCA to electronic communications sent via and stored by third parties. Yet, because Congress crafted the SCA with language specific to the technology of 1986, courts today have struggled to apply the SCA consistently with regard to similar private …