One of these days, a judge (perhaps even an AJA member judge) will go on the bench for what seems like a routine suppression hearing and will then hear the words, “Your Honor, this stop was permissible because of the Police Department’s use of predictive policing.” While you will undoubtedly be scrambling for your law clerk and searching Westlaw, perhaps thinking about the future of the Fourth Amendment might help, too.

Fabio Arcila, Jr. (Touro College – Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center) has posted Nuance, Technology, and the Fourth Amendment: A Response to Predictive Policing and Reasonable Suspicion (63 Emory Law Joural Online 87 (2014)) on SSRN.

Here is the abstract:

In an engaging critique, Professor Arcila finds that Professor Ferguson is correct in that predictive policing will likely be incorporated into Fourth Amendment law and that it will alter reasonable suspicion determinations. But Professor Arcila also argues that the potential incorporation of predictive policing reflects a larger deficiency in our Fourth Amendment jurisprudence and that it should not be adopted because it fails to adequately consider and respect a broader range of protected interests.