Predictive policing encompasses the surveillance technologies, tools, and methods employed to visualize crime, target “at-risk” individuals and groups, map physical locations, track digital communications, and collect data on individuals and communities.

With an increasing number of police departments across the country turning to unregulated, untested, and flawed facial recognition technology to identify suspects, it is vital defenders understand the technology, its limitations, and how to challenge its use in their cases.

Statement to members of the U.S. Senate regarding amendments addressing privacy concerns in the USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act of 2020 (H.R. 6172).

Coalition letter to California Assemblymember Ed Chau regarding disparities and discrimination, abuse, accuracy, information sharing, and other issues in the proposed bill AB 2261 on facial recognition technologies.

Coalition letter to members of the Senate urging more changes to the protection of American citizens before voting on the proposed USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act of 2020 (H.R. 6172).

Letter with the Due Process Institute to members of the Senate regarding the constitutional, privacy, and overreach issues arising in the Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies (EARN IT) Act of 2020 (S. 3398).

With protections in place, body cameras have the potential to better document encounters between police officers and citizens while mitigating competing concerns about their potential for misuse or abuse.

Nearly every case involves a cell phone or an online account. Laws on device and account searches are continuing to evolve, as courts reconsider old doctrines that do not fit with the realities of the digital age. Below, find sample motions on suppressing emails, passcodes, and other electronically stored information.

Comments to the U.S. Courts Administrative Office on the consequences of allowing public access to electronic criminal case files.

Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure regarding proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

This month Ian Nawalinski reviews Habeas Data by Cyrus Farivar.

In United States v. Jones, the Supreme Court will decide whether law enforcement may conduct GPS surveillance 24 hours a day and seven days a week without probably cause and without judicial oversight.

In United States v. Jones, the Supreme Court will decide whether law enforcement may conduct GPS surveillance 24 hours a day and seven days a week without probable cause and without judicial oversight.

The time has come for the government to provide full disclosure of the complete nature and extent of its secret serveillance programs and the secret law that forms the basis for the programs.