“I want to remind you, there's no regulation,” cautioned Barry Friedman in reference to the lack of legal oversight surrounding data surveillance technologies during the 68th Henry J. Miller Distinguished Lecture69th Henry J. Miller Distinguished Lecture at Georgia State University College of Law. Friedman, the Jacob D. Fuchsberg Professor of Law and director of the Policing Project at New York University School of Law, delivered the lecture, entitled “Big Brother, Big Data.”
In his talk, he opened a window into the numerous ways information is captured throughout our daily lives, and how that surveillance can be used by government organizations and law enforcement agencies without our knowledge. Technology like license plate readers, DNA databases or information gathered from our cell phones, help data companies build personalized profiles with hundreds of data points, painting a complete picture of an individual and their habits, both online and off.
Friedman expressed concerns about risks like data errors, misuse, hacking and privacy alongside potential benefits such as crime deterrence and prevention.
"Our approach is to ask a series of questions,” he said, explaining that we should consider both the risks and benefits of these technologies and how we might mitigate or eliminate risks through regulation.
Friedman expressed concerns about risks like data errors, misuse, hacking and privacy alongside potential benefits such as crime deterrence and prevention. Citing previous instances where people’s private information has been used against them en masse, he cautioned: "The lesson that we all have learned too many times... is that if there's a government intent on rounding people up ..., it helps to have a whole bunch of data and lists so that you know where to find people and know what they're up to.”
Beyond the specific technology that captures this data, Friedman emphasized that the broader practice of indiscriminate surveillance may violate Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Georgia State Professor of Law Russell Covey found the lecture to be both timely and relevant to his own instruction in the classroom. “This issue is one of the central concerns for my Criminal Procedure students,” he said. “The doctrine regulating access and use of digital data has been in flux for many years now, and several of the Justices are now openly questioning the basic framework we have used since the 1960s to sort out how and when Fourth Amendment protections apply.”
In Friedman’s view, legislative action will be necessary to regulate data surveillance rather than leaving it to individual law enforcement agencies. “If the Supreme Court held instead that indiscriminate data surveillance is a search or a seizure, the police and prosecutors would be running to legislative bodies begging for a statute to regulate what they were doing,” he emphasized. “And that is precisely what I think needs to happen in this area.”
As modern legal education intersects with innovation in artificial intelligence and data analytics, experts stress the importance of exposing the implications of these technologies.
Dan Quiggin (center), a data analytics academic professional in the Law Library, listens intently to the lecture.
“Friedman’s lecture was a reminder of the rapid pace at which the world is changing, and the central role lawyers can and must play in making sure it changes in the right direction,” said Dan Quiggin, a data analytics academic professional in the Law Library, who teaches and supports the programs and projects associated with the Legal Analytics & Innovation Initiative certificate program.
“A significant part of that is understanding how these AI models work - it may seem like magic, but it's just math,” Quiggin explained. “In math, especially math as complicated as this, there can be errors, and these errors can be costly.”
As part of his visit to the College of Law, Friedman also conducted a moot court session, allowing students to engage in a simulated argument for Andre v. Clayton County, the day before he appeared before the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. In his argument, Friedman asked the Court to reinstate the original case, which alleges racial profiling by Clayton County police officers in their practice of searches and seizures conducted on jet bridges at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport.
The Henry J. Miller Distinguished Lecture Series is supported by the Charles Loridans Foundation Inc. and named for the late Henry J. Miller, a partner in the law firm of Alston & Bird for more than 50 years. Miller garnered an extensive list of achievements through his legal career, including being designated as the amicus curiae of the Supreme Court of Georgia for his distinguished service and contribution to the improvement of the administration of Justice.