A comprehensive resource for activists, protesters, and community organizers.
This guide provides a detailed overview of the surveillance technologies used by law enforcement in Chicago. It is intended to be a resource for activists, journalists, and the public to understand the city’s surveillance infrastructure and its legal implications.
Chicago’s CCTV network is one of the most extensive in the world. It is a combination of public and private cameras integrated into a single system managed by the Office of Emergency Management and Communications (OEMC).
The integrated camera network is used for a variety of purposes, including:
The Illinois Eavesdropping Law is a “two-party consent” law, meaning it is generally illegal to record a private conversation without the consent of all parties. However, the law was amended to allow for the recording of on-duty police officers in public. This is a critical protection for activists who wish to document police activity, including their use of surveillance technology.
ShotSpotter is an acoustic gunshot detection system that uses a network of microphones to detect and locate gunfire. The system is designed to alert police to shootings in real-time, even if no one calls 911.
ShotSpotter has been deployed in several Chicago neighborhoods, primarily on the South and West Sides. However, the technology is highly controversial for several reasons:
While the Eavesdropping Law primarily applies to conversations, the use of ShotSpotter raises questions about the reasonable expectation of privacy in public spaces. The constant monitoring of sounds in a neighborhood could be seen as a form of mass surveillance.
The Chicago Police Department (CPD) uses facial recognition technology to identify individuals by comparing images from various sources against a database of known faces.
The CPD uses facial recognition in a variety of ways, including:
The CPD has used a variety of facial recognition technologies, including the controversial Clearview AI, which scrapes images from social media and other public websites. This practice has raised serious privacy concerns, as it allows law enforcement to build a massive database of faces without the consent of the individuals pictured.
The Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) is one of the strongest biometric privacy laws in the country. It requires private entities to obtain informed consent before collecting, using, or storing biometric information, including facial scans. While BIPA does not directly apply to law enforcement, it can be used to hold private companies like Clearview AI accountable for their role in government surveillance.
The CPD uses a variety of data-driven tools to predict where crime is likely to occur and who is likely to be involved. While the specific term “CLEAR” is not always used, the concept of a consolidated database for predictive policing is a reality in Chicago.
These systems, such as the now-defunct “Strategic Subject List,” use historical data on arrests, gang affiliations, and other factors to assign individuals a risk score. This information is then used to target individuals for increased police scrutiny.
Predictive policing raises serious concerns about due process, equal protection, and the presumption of innocence. By targeting individuals based on their past associations and activities, these systems can create a self-fulfilling prophecy, leading to increased arrests and incarceration in already over-policed communities.
Cell-site simulators, also known as Stingrays, are devices that mimic cell phone towers to trick phones in a certain area into connecting to them. This allows law enforcement to track the location of phones and, in some cases, to intercept communications.
The CPD has a long and secretive history of using Stingrays. These devices can be used to track the location of a known suspect’s phone or to identify all the phones in a particular area, such as at a protest.
The use of Stingrays raises serious Fourth Amendment concerns, as it allows law enforcement to conduct a general search of all phones in a given area without a warrant. The secrecy surrounding the use of this technology also makes it difficult for the public to hold the police accountable.
The Illinois Protecting Household Privacy Act (PHPA) is a state law that requires law enforcement to obtain a warrant before accessing data from smart devices in a home. This includes devices like smart speakers, smart TVs, and home security cameras.
The PHPA provides an important layer of protection against government surveillance in the home. By requiring a warrant, the law ensures that law enforcement cannot access the vast amounts of data collected by smart devices without probable cause.
Chicago’s surveillance infrastructure is vast and complex. However, by understanding the technologies that are being used and the legal frameworks that govern them, activists can work to protect their privacy and to hold law enforcement accountable. Here are some key takeaways: