University of Iowa law students learning how police use technology in criminal cases
The Gazette offers audio versions of articles using Instaread. Some words may be mispronounced.
The University of Iowa College of Law this semester started a Technology Law Clinic after adding Megan Graham, an associate clinical professor, to the faculty in January. Graham, a nationally recognized expert in technology and surveillance issues, is the director of the clinic, which focuses on the role of police technology in criminal cases.
Graham did her undergraduate work at Georgetown University and earned a bachelor of science in Foreign Service in culture and politics. Then she received a master’s degree in comparative ethnic conflict from Queens University in Belfast before going to New York University School of Law. She previously taught in the Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic at University of California Berkeley School of Law.
Graham also clerked for then-Magistrate Judge Katherine Menendez in the U.S. District of Minnesota. She also worked at the Brennan Center for Justice and was the privacy, security and technology fellow and assistant managing editor at Just Security, an online forum for the analysis of security, democracy, foreign policy and rights.
Q: Can you provide us with an overview of the Technology Law Clinic?
A: It is the first of its kind at the University of Iowa and College of Law. There are a few other technology law clinics in the Midwest and there are more than 70 technology/intellectual property clinics around the country.
The clinic gives practical experience to students who work on cases with real clients. They don’t work directly with defendants themselves but instead with defense attorneys, nonprofits and other organizations who represent clients. The students may work on litigation, legislative advocacy, analyze public records or pursue policy change.
The students are learning and building expertise in the technology being used and asking where, why and in what context is it being used in those cases. Technology is on the rise around the country, even in smaller communities because police have access to more of it.
Q: What are some examples of technology being used by police in criminal cases?
A: Surveillance like cameras and license plate readers, mass data collection and (specialized tech like) ShotSpotter, which detects gunshots; search warrants for cellphones and computers, which can provide location information from third-party companies — cell providers; facial recognition software; and DNA analysis software — genotyping to determine an individual’s genetic makeup (typically used in cold cases).
There are privacy concerns because frequently devices like ShotSpotter and other surveillance techniques are disproportionately deployed in communities that are already more highly policed. In the case of ShotSpotter, that means the technology will alert and send police officers to those same communities, which means police are more consistently present and watching folks in those areas.
There’s a cycle: heavy policing leads to tech like ShotSpotter being installed, which leads to more policing in that area based on alerts, which then leads to installation of more surveillance tech, and so on. And all along the way, those communities are being watched more closely and experience more government intrusion into their lives.
And to be clear, around the country, the communities where surveillance like this happens are disproportionately lower income and disproportionately Black and brown. A “Wired” article from earlier this year found that nearly 70 percent of the people who live in a neighborhood with a ShotSpotter sensor are Black or Latinx.
Many of the search warrants are overbroad (authorizes search or seizure not supported by probable cause) and are being used in all kinds of situations. Using search warrants for cellphones of suspects in bar fights have become routine policing.
Q: How many students are working in the clinic this semester?
A: There are eight students in the clinic, which will probably be normal size for the clinic. I spend about 27 to 30 hours with students in the clinic. They may be filing lawsuits, accessing court records, doing legal research for legislative, civil liberties or civil rights issues.
Q: How did you get into technology law?
A: While going to law school, I worked in two law clinics focusing on liberty and national security and technology. During that time, there were detention issues at Guantanamo Bay — how we were treating suspects in detention. Then Edward Snowden was indicted (for espionage after leaking classified information from the National Security Agency) and I became interested in surveillance and technology issues. It was a natural evolution for me.
This is my dream job — clinical teaching — and the University of Iowa faculty was willing to let me lead the clinic. I grew up in Arizona. It’s been a lovely transition to Iowa. People are welcoming. The culture is different (than California), but I’ve lived in many different places. I love having a backyard with a walnut tree.
Comments: (319) 398-8318; [email protected]
link