Since the terrorist events occurring on September 11, 2001, policing strategies have implemented new approaches and newly available technologies. These technological advancements have allowed large cities to create expansive networks of video surveillance, redefining the observational techniques and patrolling methods of the previous decades. Although the United States utilizes a system of federalism, dividing legal authorities at the state and national levels, the increase of interconnected threats has unified resources and efforts of protection. In response to terrorist threats and international drug trafficking, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has created supportive funding and legal interpretations, allowing state and local police strategies to better serve localized efforts in return for fulfilling the needs of national protection. In order to implement more elaborate structures of surveillance, definitions of civil liberties were challenged and in need of redefining.
The history of civil rights and police surveillance has always been linked to the interpretation of the fourth amendment of the constitution. The rights of individuals are being challenged in ways involving privacy and the usage of surveillance obtained evidence within the court system. One of these imposed threats of civil rights involves the questionable justification of police video surveillance on any or all individuals without warrant, probable cause, or even reasonable suspicion. The 1967 ‘expectation of privacy’ doctrine, as determined by the US Supreme Court case Katz v. United States, protected citizens from warrantless government intrusion. The ‘exclusionary rule’ allows for the court rejection of illegally obtained police evidence (Bloss W. P., 2009). Oppositional groups of police video surveillance, such as the American Civil Liberties Union, argue that the surveillance methods used by the police allow for the illegal practice of observing law abiding citizens,...