2019] POLICING POLICE ACCESS 621
In Chicago, for instance, knowledge of personal identity affords police
access to a “Strategic Subject List”2 and a “[H]eat [L]ist” containing risk
analyses of individuals believed likely to be involved in future violence.3 In
New York City, police, as in many other locations, maintain a list of suspected
gang members,4 and also utilize a “Domain Awareness System” that assembles
and links information from multiple sources, such as video surveillance,
license plate readers, and arrest records.5 Boston police collect and store
observational “data on the activities and whereabouts of known and suspected
criminals and their associates.”6 Meanwhile, data “fusion centers” nationwide
combine and analyze data from multiple sources,7 including private
businesses8 and household devices comprising the “Internet of Things.”9
Police also rely upon more traditional databases containing arrest
warrants and information regarding prior stops, arrests, and convictions,10
and biometric information such as fingerprints and DNA, resulting in what
Justice Scalia has called a “genetic panopticon.”11 No less significant,
databases often contain information of a highly sensitive nature, which while
2. Mick Dumke & Frank Main, A Look Inside the Watch List Chicago Police Fought to Keep Secr et,
CHI. SUN-TIMES (May 18, 2017, 9:26 AM), https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/what-gets-people-
3. Monica Davey, Chicago Police Try to Predict Who May Shoot or Be Shot, N.Y. TIMES (May 23, 2016),
may-shoot-or-be-shot. html; Jeremy Gorn er, Chicago Police Use ‘Heat List’ as Strategy to Prevent Violence,
CHI. TRIB. (Aug. 21, 2013), http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-08-21/news/ct-met-heat-
4. See K. Babe Howell, Gang Policing: The Post Stop-and-Frisk Justification for Profile-B ased
Policing, 5 U. DENV. CRIM. L. REV. 1, 15–16 (2015).
5. Rocco Parascandola & Tina Moore, NYPD Unveils New $40 Million Super Computer System
that Uses Data from Network of Cameras, License Plate Readers and Crime Reports, N.Y. DAILY NEWS
(Aug. 8, 2012, 8:50 PM), http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nypd-unveils-new-40-million-
See generally Christopher Slobogin, Panvasive Surveillance, Political Process Theory, a nd the Nondelegation
Doctrine, 102 GEO. L.J. 1721 (2014) (surveying wide variety of “panvasive surveillance” techniques
employed by police).
6. Jeffrey Fagan et al., Stops and Stares: Street Stops, Surveillance, and Race in the New Policing,
43 FORDHAM URB. L.J. 539, 547 (2016) (quoting Bos. Police Dep’t, Special Order SO 05-023,
June 3, 2005, § 1).
7. See, e.g., National Network of Fusion Centers Fact Sheet, U.S. DEP’T HOMELAND SECURITY,
https://www.dhs.gov/national-network-fusion-centers-fact-sheet (last updated Aug. 14, 2018)
(describing centers as “focal points . . . for the receipt, analysis, gathering, and sharing of threat-
related information [between the] federal [government and] state, local, tribal, and territorial
[and private sector] partners”).
8. Chris Jay Hoofnagle, Big Brother’s Little Helpers: How ChoicePoint and Other Commercial Brokers
Collect and Package Your Data for Law Enforcement, 29 N.C. J. INT’L L. & COM. REG. 595, 621–22 (2004).
9. See generally Andrew Guthrie Ferguson, The “Smart” Fourth Amendment, 102 CORNELL L.
REV. 547, 554–60 (2017) (discussing how smart devices record data on human behavior and
intentions that can be used by law enforcement).
10. For a comprehensive treatment of the role played by criminal records more generally,
see JAMES B. JACOBS, THE ETERNAL CRIMINAL RECORD (2015).
11. Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. 435, 466, 478–82 (2013) (Scalia, J., dissenting).