This week begins our third week and there will be a slight change to our course-material schedule, due to one of our guest speaker's scheudling requests. As such, for next week's Rivera reading assignment, •GERALDO, Chapter 6, “Importing Terror” (Week 4 reading assignment) will be due before next week's class. Please review the syllabus for clarification or email me directly. Please also read pp. 6-16 of the PDF email handout, "Biometrics."

This week we will be be viewing the flim, Avalon. At our the break, however, we will be meeting with one of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's supervisory agents in the global inititives unit, "T.L." (We will resume our viewing of Avalon the following week).

FBI Special Agent L____'s presentation will give much illumination to last week's discussion of immigration and terrorism in the United States. His presention will also encompass border issues, global security, immigarion and terrroist issues, and "BIOMETRICS," the U.S. government's use of fingerprinting immigrants--and "other" technology to monitor immigrants inside America (and globally).

Aside from the PDF hand out on Biometrics, there are some things you should know about Biometrics and Immigration in the U.S. How biometric identification works, in sum, is as follows:

Several basic steps are required to make biometric information—our personal physiological features--useful in a contemporary security context.

First, "our" data must be collected as a reference. That's me and you. In order to "catch" a suspected member of a terrorist network, for example, one must compile or collect this information in advance.

That fingerprint, retinal scan, or "facial characteristic map" must first be on record so that it can be used as a reference when the suspected criminal tries to make it through an airport or cross a country border.

State of the art computer programs then use established algorithms to cycle very quickly through their entire collection of references to find a match. If the person crossing the border matches an existing reference at an extremely high threshold, for example, and that reference is for a suspected criminal, then the biometric system has done its job. What are some of the inherent problems with this sort of system? Courld it endanger any constitutionally protected rights? What, if anything, can be done to ensure privacy, for example?


Also, to those who particpated in the blog assignment last week, your thougtful comments are well taken. Well done! Finally, please see below for the Avalon Film Study Guide.

See you next week...

Christopher W. Helt, Esq.

Micah said,

(all of the above said...)
One of the dangers inherent in this technology, as with many other state-of-the-art devices used in similar ways, is that because it is considered so cutting edge, it is seen as foolproof. And because it can deliver its results instantaneously, legal action (such as deportation) can be undertaken extremely quickly, before a case can be really examined as it should be.

I am not sure this speaks to the question of constitutionality, but this technology also seems to be the latest in a string of measures that criminalizes everyone whether or not we have ever committed crimes or ever will commit crimes. And since the technology is being used in particular on immigrant groups, it will be unfairly and disproportionately used to gather data on immigrant groups... thus treating all members of racial groups traditionally associated with immigrant status in this country (e.g. Latinos and Asians) as suspect, as potential undocumented immigrants. To me, it seems destined to be used in a way that smacks strongly of racial profiling.

Micah

nh said...

I agree with Micah, that this technology could cause more problems and raise more concerns then it would help; like gathering data and being used as a census and racial profiling. It seems all too easy of a solution or "goal of safer America" (20).. Relying too heavily on something like this can cause tremendous problems, and as mentioned in the article, "technology is not perfect" (10). Although they are working to improve certain faulty areas, especially with facial recognition, it still seems like these kind of errors can still occur and will never be completely certain with 100 percent accuracy, that a person entering the US is in fact a terrorist.

1:36 PM

Aida said...

I do not see anything wrong with biometrics if it can prevent or at least dissuade terrorists or criminals in general from entering a country. I had to get a biometric passport to come to the United States and I had no problem with that.
I am much more concerned by the fact that after 9/11 some people such as politicians or the media have taken advantage of the situation by playing on the voters’ fear and came to equate illegals with potential terrorists. It seems to me that passing repressive bills on immigrants or building a wall are not very efficient ways to fight against terrorism… Geraldo Rivera makes a good point when he says that “The Saudi Arabian attackers had all entered the United States legally and then overstayed their legally obtained tourist visas” (p.115). So in the case of criminals trying to enter the country, I think that biometrics is definitely useful.
And as far as civil liberties are concerned, I am more comfortable with the idea of having my fingerprints and picture entered in a database than with the fact that the FBI can search my telephone, email and financial records under the Patriot Act.

5:44 PM