Race, Brain Science, and Critical Decision-Making in the Context of Constitutional Criminal Procedure

This article surveys current and emerging neuroscience research that is uncovering deep cognitive-level and unconscious connections between race or racial constructs, perception, and decision making. Using those findings as a platform for consideration, the article addresses several implications that these cognitive patterns might have for the particular kinds of perceptual experiences and decision making opportunities that are relevant in the context of criminal law enforcement and police procedure, and begins to evaluate the influence that these cognitive trends may have on the development of specific legal regulatory mechanisms and their application to the larger law enforcement complex

The Constitutional and Statutory Framework Organizing the Office of the United States Attorney

The U.S. Attorney position is one characterized by a broad delegation of the duty to enforce the laws of the United States, and to appear on behalf of the government in any civil action involving the United States or its revenues. This delegation of duties necessarily entails the exercise of discretion, and that exercise of discretion necessarily depends on the United States Attorneys\u27 independence of judgment. The U.S. Attorney can thus be described as an agent with multiple principles, or a servant of two masters: the U.S. Attorneys clearly serve at the pleasure of the President, must be responsive to the Department of Justice, and must also consider local conditions, and yet the Attorneys\u27 ultimate duty is to serve, advance, and enforce the law while ensuring uniform application of just principles

Letting Katz out of the Bag: Cognitive Freedom and Fourth Amendment Fidelity

What would life be like if it became impossible to keep a secret? We may find out with the advent of a new technology called Brain Fingerprinting and other technologies that allow access to our very thoughts. This Article first discusses the advent of technology like Brain Fingerprinting and its kin, and their impact on cognitive autonomy. The Article then posits the question, what would the Constitution have to say about evidentiary inquiries into the mind through the use of such technology? The author argues that current Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, including Katz v. United States, is inadequate to address such a question, and concludes with a call to reevaluate our understanding of the Fourth Amendment and to seek alternative methods that offer more satisfying resolution of these issues

How Privacy Killed Katz: A Tale of Cognitive Freedom and the Property of Personhood as Fourth Amendment Norm

With each passing day, new technologies push the horizons of official government investigative and surveillance activity deeper and deeper into the mind and consciousness of the surveilled subject. While law enforcement agencies have always relied on observing the behavior and activity of suspicious targets, and there has been little judicial ink spent preserving the confidentiality of such observable activity, the law has been slow to respond to rapid increases in the capacity or scope of official observation that the advance of technologically sophisticated surveillance techniques helped facilitate. The sampling of techniques at the center of this Article allow the operators to analyze, with a very high degree of accuracy, the cognitive activity occurring within the human brain, certain types of substantive information that may be stored there, and even the likely decision-making processes the brain has engaged in or will in the future engage. Because these techniques allow access to the cerebral and neurological landscape of the subject, from an individual’s emotional and ethical profile to her memories and intentions, I have chosen to label this class of information-gathering methods as cognitive camera technology (CCT) for convenience

The Constitutional and Statutory Framework Organizing the Office of the United States Attorney

The U.S. Attorney position is one characterized by a broad delegation of the duty to enforce the laws of the United States, and to appear on behalf of the government in any civil action involving the United States or its revenues. This delegation of duties necessarily entails the exercise of discretion, and that exercise of discretion necessarily depends on the United States Attorneys\u27 independence of judgment. The U.S. Attorney can thus be described as an agent with multiple principles, or a servant of two masters: the U.S. Attorneys clearly serve at the pleasure of the President, must be responsive to the Department of Justice, and must also consider local conditions, and yet the Attorneys\u27 ultimate duty is to serve, advance, and enforce the law while ensuring uniform application of just principles

2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease

The recommendations listed in this document are, whenever possible, evidence based. An extensive evidence review was conducted as the document was compiled through December 2008. Repeated literature searches were performed by the guideline development staff and writing committee members as new issues were considered. New clinical trials published in peer-reviewed journals and articles through December 2011 were also reviewed and incorporated when relevant. Furthermore, because of the extended development time period for this guideline, peer review comments indicated that the sections focused on imaging technologies required additional updating, which occurred during 2011. Therefore, the evidence review for the imaging sections includes published literature through December 2011

Race, Brain Science, and Critical Decision-Making in the Context of Constitutional Criminal Procedure

This article surveys current and emerging neuroscience research that is uncovering deep cognitive-level and unconscious connections between race or racial constructs, perception, and decision making. Using those findings as a platform for consideration, the article addresses several implications that these cognitive patterns might have for the particular kinds of perceptual experiences and decision making opportunities that are relevant in the context of criminal law enforcement and police procedure, and begins to evaluate the influence that these cognitive trends may have on the development of specific legal regulatory mechanisms and their application to the larger law enforcement complex