Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Suspicious activity reports (SARs) are an increasingly important tool in the law-enforcement repertoire, especially for counterterrorism. In spite of significant problems with such reports, they are experiencing a resurgence that can be attributed partly to the institutionalization of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) “fusion centers,” which are taking the lead in vetting and interpreting these reports as they enter into law-enforcement and counterterrorism databases. Based on a 3-year study of DHS fusion centers, this article reviews a range of problems with SARs and argues that robust community relationships are necessary to achieve contextually situated reports that eschew overt forms of bias.

Keywords

suspicious activity reports fusion centers homeland security

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Civil Liberties Union. (2004, August). The surveillance-industrial complex: How the American Government is conscripting businesses and individuals in the construction of a surveillance society. Retrieved from www.aclu.org/FilesPDFs/surveillance_report.pdf

American Civil Liberties Union. (2010, June). More about suspicious activity reporting. Retrieved from http://www.aclu.org/spy-files/more-about-suspicious-activity-reporting

Department of Justice. (2010, January). Final report: Information Sharing Environment (ISE)-Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) evaluation environment. Retrieved from ise.gov/sites/default/files/BJA_Final_Report_ISE_SAR_EE.pdf

Electronic Privacy Information Center. (2007, June). National network of fusion centers raises specter of COINTELPRO. Retrieved from http://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/spotlight/0607/

Geiger

(2009, April 27). Thwarting civil liberties—The problem with domestic intelligence. Center for Democracy and Technology. Retrieved from http://cdt.org/blogs/harley-geiger/thwarting-civil-liberties-problem-domestic-intelligence

German

Stanley

(2007, December). What’s wrong with fusion centers? Retrieved from http://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/privacy/fusioncenter_20071212.pdf

German

Stanley

(2008, July). Fusion center update. Retrieved from www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/privacy/fusion_update_20080729.pdf

Greenberg

M. A.

(2005). Citizens defending America: From colonial times to the age of terrorism. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Hentoff

(2002, December 17). The death of operation TIPS: Volunteer spying corps dismissed. The Village Voice. Retrieved from http://www.villagevoice.com/2002-12-17/news/the-death-of-operation-tips/

10.

Levi

M. L.

Wall

D. S.

(2004). Technologies, security, and privacy in the post-9/11 European Information Society. Journal of Law and Society, 31, 194-220.

11.

Michaels

(2008). All the president’s spies: Private-public intelligence partnerships in the war on terror. California Law Review, 96, 901-966.

12.

Michaels

(2010). Deputizing homeland security. Texas Law Review, 88, 1435-1473.

13.

Monahan

(2011). The future of security? Surveillance operations at Homeland Security Fusion Centers. Social Justice, 37(2-3), 84-98.

14.

Monahan

Regan

P. M.

(2012). Zones of Opacity: Data Fusion in Post-9/11 Security Organizations. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 27(3), 301-317.

15.

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. (2004, July 22). The 9/11 commission report (Final Report). Retrieved from http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

16.

Newkirk

A. B.

(2010). The rise of the fusion-intelligence complex: A critique of political surveillance after 9/11. Surveillance & Society, 8, 43-60.

17.

New York State Intelligence Center, “New York State Law Enforcement Terrorism Indicators Reference Card” (September 3, 2008), http://publicintelligence.net/new-york-state-law-enforcement-terrorism-indicators-reference-card/

18.

Nojeim

G. T.

(2009, March 18). Homeland security intelligence: Its relevance and limitations. Testimony before the house committee on homeland security, subcommittee on intelligence, information sharing, and terrorism risk assessment. Retrieved from http://www.cdt.org/testimony/testimony-greg-nojeim-homeland-security-intelligence-its-relevance-and-limitations

19.

O’Harrow

Jr. (2008, April 2). Centers tap into personal databases; state groups were formed after 9/11. The Washington Post, p. A01.

20.

O’Harrow

Jr. Nakashima

(2008, March 6). National dragnet is a click away; Authorities to gain fast and expansive access to records. The Washington Post, p. A01.

21.

Randol

M. A.

(2009, November 5). Terrorism information sharing and the nationwide suspicious activity report initiative: Background and issues for congress (CRS 7-7500). Retrieved from http://www.ijis.org/docs/NSI%20Report_R40901.pdf

22.

Reeves

(2012). If you see something, say something: Lateral surveillance and the uses of responsibility. Surveillance & Society, 10, 235-248.

23.

Regan

P. M.

Monahan

(2013). Beyond Counterterrorism: Data Sharing, Privacy, and Organizational Histories of DHS Fusion Centers. International Journal of E-Politics, 4(3), 1-14.

24.

Rollins

(2008). Fusion Centers: Issues and Options for Congress. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.

25.

Steiner

J. E.

(2010). More is better: The analytic case for a robust suspicious activity reports program. Homeland Security Affairs, 6(3), 1-12. Retrieved from http://www.hsaj.org/?article=6.3.5

26.

Strom

Hollywood

Pope

(2009, June). Using 911 calls to detect terrorism threats (National Institute of Justice Journal, No. 263, pp. 24-29). Retrieved from http://www.nij.gov/journals/263/911-calls.htm

27.

Thacher

(2005). The local role in homeland security. Law & Society Review, 39, 635-676.

28.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2006). DHS Strengthens Intel Sharing at State and Local Fusion Centers. Retrieved from https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=476394

29.

U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. (2012). Federal support for and involvement in state and local fusion centers. Retrieved from http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/download/report_federal-support-for-and-involvement-in-state-and-local-fusions-centers

30.

van Brakel

de Hert

(2011). Policing, surveillance and law in a pre-crime society: Understanding the consequences of technology based strategies. Journal of Police Studies, 20, 163-192.

31.

Wagner

(2010). Testimony of Under Secretary Caryn Wagner before the House Subcommittee on Homeland Security on the President’s Fiscal Year 2011 Budget Request for the Department’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security. Retrieved from http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/testimony/testimony_1267716038879.shtm

32.

Williams

(2011, September). Database: Mall of American suspicious activity reports. NPR. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/2011/08/18/139756444/database-mall-of-america-suspicious-activity-reports

33.

Wolf

(2012, December 29). Revealed: How the FBI coordinated the crackdown on Occupy. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy

34.

Wolosky

Heifetz

(2002-2003). Regulating terrorism. Law and Policy in International Business, 34, 1-5.

Constructing the Suspicious

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References