THE MINORITY REPORT MEETS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-WHAT WOULD TOM CRUISE DO?

This Note will explore the state of electronic monitoring (EM) in the United States’ federal, state, and local justice systems, specifically critiquing the relationship between the government and private corporations in administering these services. Although EM is often thought of as a positive alternative to incarceration, there are severe and negative costs associated with it. The most alarming of those costs is the loss of privacy lived by thousands in the United States. Evolving technologies are making it easier for data to be collected and used to further persecute those in the justice system, arguably in ways that extend beyond justifiable purposes of that system. Few laws protect justice-involved people from being overly surveilled, and government agencies routinely fail to safeguard the privacy of those being monitored. Public corrections agencies relinquish their power to private corporations to implement monitoring practices and collect personal data with limited oversight. Because of the risks associated with the privatization of EM, the government contracts governing the use of EM within the justice system must include standardized requirements and protections to avoid abuses and mitigate the risks identified in this Note. In contracting with private vendors to facilitate EM services, government agencies should implement the European Union General Data Protection Regulation. Adoption of these provisions would ensure that EM of justice-involved individuals is accomplished in a way that fosters cooperation between private corporations and the government and appropriately regulates the management of private data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]