TY - JOUR
T1 - From the national surveillance state to the cybersurveillance state
AU - Hu, Margaret
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright ©2017 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved.
PY - 2017/10/13
Y1 - 2017/10/13
N2 - This article anchors the phenomenon of bureaucratized cybersurveillance around the concept of the National Surveillance State, a theory attributed to Professor Jack Balkin of Yale Law School and Professor Sanford Levinson of the University of Texas School of Law. Pursuant to the theory of the National Surveillance State, because of the routinized and administrative nature of government-led surveillance, normalized mass surveillance is viewed as justified under crime and counterterrorism policy rationales. This article contends that the Cybersurveillance State is the successor to the National Surveillance State. The Cybersurveillance State harnesses technologies that fuse biometric and biographic data for risk assessment, embedding bureaucratized biometric cybersurveillance within the Administrative State. In ways that are largely invisible, the Cybersurveillance State constructs digital avatars for administrative governance objectives and targets digital data deemed suspicious. Consequently, constitutional violations stemming from cybersurveillance systems will be increasingly difficult to identify and challenge.
AB - This article anchors the phenomenon of bureaucratized cybersurveillance around the concept of the National Surveillance State, a theory attributed to Professor Jack Balkin of Yale Law School and Professor Sanford Levinson of the University of Texas School of Law. Pursuant to the theory of the National Surveillance State, because of the routinized and administrative nature of government-led surveillance, normalized mass surveillance is viewed as justified under crime and counterterrorism policy rationales. This article contends that the Cybersurveillance State is the successor to the National Surveillance State. The Cybersurveillance State harnesses technologies that fuse biometric and biographic data for risk assessment, embedding bureaucratized biometric cybersurveillance within the Administrative State. In ways that are largely invisible, the Cybersurveillance State constructs digital avatars for administrative governance objectives and targets digital data deemed suspicious. Consequently, constitutional violations stemming from cybersurveillance systems will be increasingly difficult to identify and challenge.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85031666919&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85031666919&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113701
DO - 10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113701
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85031666919
SN - 1550-3585
VL - 13
SP - 161
EP - 180
JO - Annual Review of Law and Social Science
JF - Annual Review of Law and Social Science
ER -