More Like this

1. The law in computation: What machine learning, artificial intelligence, and big data mean for law and society scholarship

   https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12164  

   DoCarmo, Tania; Rea, Stephen; Conaway, Evan; Emery, John; Raval, Noopur (April 2021, Law & Policy)

   Abstract Computational systems, including machine learning, artificial intelligence, and big data analytics, are not only inescapable parts of social life but are also reshaping the contours of law and legal practice. We propose turning more law and social science (LSS) attention to new technological developments through the study of “law in computation,” that is, computational systems' integration with regulatory and administrative procedures, the sociotechnical infrastructures that support them, and their impact on how individuals and populations are interpellated through the law. We present a range of cases in three areas of inquiry ‐ algorithmic governance, jurisdiction and agency ‐ on issues such as immigration enforcement, data sovereignty, algorithmic warfare, biometric identity regimes, and gig economies, for which examining law in computation illuminates how new technological systems' integration with legal processes pushes the distinction between “law on the books” and “law in action” into new domains.We then propose future directions and methods for research. As computational systems become ever more sophisticated, understanding the law in computation is critical not only for LSS scholarship, but also for everyday civics. 

   more » « less
2. Law Enforcement and Legal Professionals’ Trust in Algorithms

   https://doi.org/10.1177/2755323X251325594  

   Kennedy, Ryan; Tiede, Lydia; Austin, Amanda; Ismael, Kenzy (June 2025, Journal of Law & Empirical Analysis)

   AI algorithms are increasingly influencing decision-making in criminal justice, including tasks such as predicting recidivism and identifying suspects by their facial features. The increasing reliance on machine-assisted legal decision-making impacts the rights of criminal defendants, the work of law enforcement agents, the legal strategies taken by attorneys, the decisions made by judges, and the public’s trust in courts. As such, it is crucial to understand how the use of AI is perceived by the professionals who interact with algorithms. The analysis explores the connection between law enforcement and legal professionals’ stated and behavioral trust. Results from three rigorous survey experiments suggest that law enforcement and legal professionals express skepticism about algorithms but demonstrate a willingness to integrate their recommendations into their own decisions and, thus, do not exhibit “algorithm aversion.” These findings suggest that there could be a tendency towards increased reliance on machine-assisted legal decision-making despite concerns about the impact of AI on the rights of criminal defendants. 

   more » « less
3. The interaction of ice and law in Arctic marine accessibility

   https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2202720119  

   Lynch, Amanda H.; Norchi, Charles H.; Li, Xueke (June 2022, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)

   Sea ice levies an impost on maritime navigability in the Arctic, but ice cover diminution due to anthropogenic climate change is generating expectations for improved accessibility in coming decades. Projections of sea ice cover retreating preferentially from the eastern Arctic suggest key provisions of international law of the sea will require revision. Specifically, protections against marine pollution in ice-covered seas enshrined in Article 234 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea have been used in recent decades to extend jurisdictional competence over the Northern Sea Route only loosely associated with environmental outcomes. Projections show that plausible open water routes through international waters may be accessible by midcentury under all but the most aggressive of emissions control scenarios. While inter- and intraannual variability places the economic viability of these routes in question for some time, the inevitability of a seasonally ice-free Arctic will be attended by a reduction of regulatory friction and a recalibration of associated legal frameworks. 

   more » « less
4. Untapped capacity for resilience in environmental law

   https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1906247116  

   Garmestani, Ahjond; Ruhl, J. B.; Chaffin, Brian C.; Craig, Robin K.; van Rijswick, Helena F.; Angeler, David G.; Folke, Carl; Gunderson, Lance; Twidwell, Dirac; Allen, Craig R. (October 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)

   Over the past several decades, environmental governance has made substantial progress in addressing environmental change, but emerging environmental problems require new innovations in law, policy, and governance. While expansive legal reform is unlikely to occur soon, there is untapped potential in existing laws to address environmental change, both by leveraging adaptive and transformative capacities within the law itself to enhance social-ecological resilience and by using those laws to allow social-ecological systems to adapt and transform. Legal and policy research to date has largely overlooked this potential, even though it offers a more expedient approach to addressing environmental change than waiting for full-scale environmental law reform. We highlight examples from the United States and the European Union of untapped capacity in existing laws for fostering resilience in social-ecological systems. We show that governments and other governance agents can make substantial advances in addressing environmental change in the short term—without major legal reform—by exploiting those untapped capacities, and we offer principles and strategies to guide such initiatives. 

   more » « less
5. Law Enforcement Privilege

   https://doi.org/10.36644/mlr.123.8.law  

   Wexler, Rebecca (January 2025, Michigan Law Review)

   You can’t question a secret you haven’t been told. The criminal legal system depends on fair and open proceedings to expose and regulate unlawful and unconstitutional police conduct through the courts. If police can use claims of secrecy to systematically thwart criminal defendants’ access to evidence, judicial review will fail. And yet that is exactly what is happening under a common-law doctrine called the “law enforcement privilege.” The privilege empowers police and prosecutors to rely on the results of secret investigative methods while withholding information from the defense about how those methods work. It risks perpetuating unconstitutional conduct, enabling wrongful convictions, and rendering Fourth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Brady, and statutory discovery laws moot. At the same time, it has a non-frivolous policy rationale. If all police investigative methods were public information, then more people committing crimes could evade detection.How can a better balance be struck? This Article argues that current law enforcement privilege doctrine creates a dangerously boundless police secrecy power because of a subtle conceptual collapse: The policy rationale itself is mistakenly used as the test for assessing claims of privilege. The Article recommends that courts instead evaluate privilege claims by reference to the marginal risk of leaking posed by in-court disclosure. Specifically, judges should demand to know what conditions law enforcement previously imposed on access to the information. The answer to that question can be adjudicated publicly without jeopardizing a legitimate privilege claim and will help judges detect mistaken, exaggerated, pretextual, or fraudulent claims to the privilege. Further, even when law enforcement has taken care with the information, if a court-ordered protective order can match or exceed the safeguards that law enforcement itself previously maintained, then judges should default to ordering disclosure. The Article concludes by suggesting a theory of the role of confidentiality in privilege law. 

   more » « less