Artificial Intelligence, and the Internet of Things

People use wearable technologies, smart home devices, and personal medical devices daily. These internet of things (IoT) devices collect and share information without human intervention. What are the public’s expectations of privacy in a world dependent on IoT, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence?

Judges repeatedly tell jurors not to search for case-relevant information on the internet. Some jurors are not complying, and the internet is playing an increasing and proactive role in courtrooms. While the internet is a formidable repository for information, it is also a source of misinformation. The authors offer suggestions to keep the internet from subverting justice.

Brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Electronic Frontier Foundation as Amici Curiae in Support of Defendant’s Petition for Review

Comments to the U.S. Courts Administrative Office on the consequences of allowing public access to electronic criminal case files.

Coalition letter to Congressional leadership regarding the penalties imposed on Internet Service Providers for the actions of its users, as proposed in Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017 (H.R. 1865) and Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act of 2017 (S. 1693).

It is not a good idea for a lawyer to ignore online information about anyone involved in a case. Social media research can provide lawyers with a truer sense of a prospective juror than the information the juror discloses on a written juror questionnaire or in open court.

Because social media has reached a point of near saturation, people now have access to what seems like endless photographs of people in their community, and many witnesses have begun to use this as a resource to conduct their own criminal investigations. Jurors should be educated about how exposure to social media images may have affected the eyewitness evidence being brought before them.

Using Client Information in Social Media Advocacy

Some criminal defense attorneys use social media platforms, such as Twitter, to provide insight and commentary about the legal system. While this can be an effective approach, attorneys should consider the ethics rules before posting on social media. Professor Nicole Smith Futrell discusses the key ethical considerations, and she offers guidance to defenders on how to responsibly draw from their specialized knowledge and the experiences of their clients in order to expose systemic injustice.

While many attorneys feel comfortable using technology within the comfort of their offices, using technology to cross-examine a witness at trial may inspire fear and confusion. This need not be the case.

Technology, including mobile devices and cloud computing, makes some law office tasks easier, but easier is not synonymous with ethical. Internal procedures and individually managed protections are important for safeguarding client confidentiality. However, attorneys must always consider the Rules of Professional Conduct when implementing systems and procedures to manage client information.

Snapchat's Guide for Law Enforcement regarding the required legal processes for obtaining information for users' accounts.

NACDL Committee on Technology and Law Enforcement chair Samuel Guiberson's written statement to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Criminal Justice Oversight and the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime regarding the future of internet technologies and related security risks.

Letter to House leadership regarding Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017 H.R. 1865 (115th Congress).

Correcting Juror Bias: A Case Study on Internet Entrapment Julie Blackman; Corinne Brenner; Ellen Brickman November 2010 30 Lead us not into temptation But deliver us from evil From “The Lord’s Prayer” Matthew 6:13 (King James Version) To borrow a variation of the title from Steven