fourth amendment — Online Journal — Columbia Undergraduate Law Review

Is the Gang Database Unconstitutional? An analysis of the 1988 STEP Act against Fourth Amendment Rights

As the New York City Department of Investigation continues its three-year probe of the New York Police Department’s gang database, questions are being raised about the database’s constitutionality. To determine the constitutionality of the database, we have to look at the decades-long practice of criminalizing gangs in the United States and what implications it has had for policing. In order to prosecute gangs, the term itself must firstly be defined. Yet the term “gang” in U.S. law remains full of ambiguity. As such, while the penalties for alleged gang members are harsh, the grounds on which gang affiliation is determined are unclear—as is demonstrated by an analysis of gang-prosecution laws across the country.

Rainier HarrisFebruary 23, 2022gang database, fourth amendment, NYPD, gangs, police, privacy

Data Protection and the Fourth Amendment: The Implications of Airbnb, Inc. v. City of New York

In August 2018, a New York City bill that required data-sharing between short-term apartment rental platforms and New York law enforcement was signed into law and scheduled to take effect in February. The new legislation mandated that home-sharing companies share troves of hosts’ personal information with the New York City Office of Special Enforcement (OSE) on a monthly basis. In response, Airbnb, the largest home-sharing platform in New York, filed for a preliminary injunction before the law was set to take effect.

Allyssa PhelpsMay 24, 2019fourth amendment, data protection, airbnb, federalComment

Reclaiming Our Reasonable Expectation of Privacy: The Case Against the Third Party Doctrine

In the narrow 5-3 decision of Smith v. Maryland (1979), the Supreme Court warranted perhaps one of the greatest intrusions upon privacy with the establishment of the Third Party doctrine. The defendant, Michael Smith, was found guilty of robbing and sending threatening phone calls to Patricia McDonough. However, the controversy in this case lies not in Smith’s innocence or guilt, but rather in the legality of how the incriminating evidence was obtained: the warrantless use of pen registers. In this case, pen registers were used to record all numbers dialed from Smith’s phone, tracing the threatening phone call back to him.[1]