{"id":245,"date":"2017-12-20T02:46:58","date_gmt":"2017-12-20T07:46:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.nlg.org\/nlg-review\/?post_type=article&p=245"},"modified":"2017-12-21T11:36:31","modified_gmt":"2017-12-21T16:36:31","slug":"editors-preface-summer-2017","status":"publish","type":"article","link":"https:\/\/www.nlg.org\/nlg-review\/article\/editors-preface-summer-2017\/","title":{"rendered":"Editor’s Preface: Summer 2017"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Nathan Goetting, Editor-in-Chief<\/strong><\/p>\n

Right-wing pushback against the gains of the civil rights movement has al\u00adways been powerful, but with the ascension of Donald Trump to the presidency, it has become unprecedentedly aggressive and malicious. White supremacists have been emboldened by this president. Near the top of his administration\u2019s target list of civil rights reversals is race-based affirmative action in higher education. In \u201cFrom Dog-Whistle to Megaphone: The Trump Regime\u2019s Cynical Assault on Affirmative Action\u201d Mark Brodin attacks the motives and methods of the latest, most brazen attempt to keep minority applicants disadvantaged in the higher education application process.<\/p>\n

Justice Blackmun couldn\u2019t have fully appreciated the damage to the right to privacy he would cause in 1979 when he wrote the opinion for the Supreme Court in Smith v. Maryland<\/em>.1 However, we shouldn\u2019t be too easy on him or his colleagues. Modest grants of power to law enforcement in Fourth Amendment cases are nearly always expanded into the broadest possible license to reach into the personal lives of citizens.<\/p>\n

In Smith <\/em>Justice Blackmun reasoned that when we disclose who we call to a third-party (the phone company whose services we\u2019re using) we have forfeited any Fourth Amendment privacy interest we might have had in that information. Smith opened the door for police to partner with communications providers to capture, collect, and store what we now call \u201cmetadata\u201d\u2014records of who we call and are called by, when the calls take place, and for how long\u2014without probable cause of criminal wrongdoing.<\/p>\n

Smith was wrongly decided for many reasons.2 Technology has advanced so rapidly and dramatically since Smith that the ancient device at issue in that case (a \u201cpen register\u201d) is as obsolete as Blackmun\u2019s opinion authorizing its use. Smith has become the core legal basis for a massive surveillance state appara\u00adtus. Now police use \u201cstingrays\u201d\u2014portable phone trackers that divert signals from cellphones and soak up the information they contain. As an investigative tool, stingrays are infinitely more handy, powerful, and intrusive than anything imagined in the 1970s. Along with metadata, they can provide police with the location of the cell phone and the content of its communications, such as conversations and text messages, though a warrant is still required before capturing communicative content. In \u201cStingrays\u201d Joshua Dansby explains how Smith has been misconstrued so as to permit the widespread use of this new intrusive technology. Dansby proposes a number of methods for preserving our privacy. His article could hardly be timelier. This year, the Court will be considering Carpenter v. U.S.,3 which will finally force a reconsideration of an increasingly dangerous holding in Smith.<\/p>\n

In \u201cWill Koreans Count This Time?\u201d William S. Geimer examines the alarming bellicosity between the Trump administration and North Korea within the much-needed context of the U.S.\u2019s historical role as an imperial power during and after the Korean War. Though too dangerous for consideration, it seems, in corporate media and elite academic periodicals, his modest proposal is this: Why not let Koreans, north and south, take the lead in determining their own fate?<\/p>\n

\u201cAn Algorithm for Capturing White HeteroPatriarchy: The Parable of the Woman Caught in Adultery\u201d by Blanche Cook thoughtfully deploys a biblical tale to expose and explain how certain forms of hegemonic power function in the U.S. One needn\u2019t be a believer to recognize the truths. Originally delivered as a TEDx talk, Professor Cook\u2019s interpretation of the New Testament tale is as fascinating as it is liberating.<\/p>\n

Sarah Davila-Ruhaak is doing extraordinary humanitarian legal work on behalf of some of the most vulnerable and oppressed people on earth. She is the Director of the International Human Rights Clinic at The John Marshall Law School in Chicago where she leads the Human Rights for Syrians Initia\u00adtive (HRSI). In \u201cThe Sprouting of Human Rights Initiatives in the Midst of a Storm of Resistance to Refugees\u201d she assesses the legal, political, and social plight of the luckless civilians fleeing for their lives from one of the world\u2019s most perilous warzones. It also details the extraordinary work HRSI is doing to help Syrians who have escaped to the U.S. adjust to life in their new country.<\/p>\n

NLGR asked renowned human rights attorney and law professor Natsu Taylor Saito, an expert on harmful effects of colonization, if she\u2019d contribute an essay on the threats connected with the contempt for science and nature shown by various Trump appointees leading executive branch regulatory agen\u00adcies. She responded with a poem titled \u201cDenial,\u201d which we\u2019re proud to print.<\/p>\n

\u2014Nathan Goetting, editor in chief<\/p>\n

______________________<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. 442 U.S. 735 (1979).<\/li>\n
  2. Rebutting the Court\u2019s wrongheaded reasoning\u2014which suggests that the mere act of using a telephone (a prerequisite for inclusion in modern society) implies the forfeiture of privacy rights to significant amounts of personal information\u2014is beyond the scope of this preface. However, I recommend the reader consider the persuasive dissents in this case written by Justices Stewart and Marshall.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    By Nathan Goetting, Editor-in-Chief Right-wing pushback against the gains of the civil rights movement has al\u00adways been powerful, but with the ascension of Donald Trump to the presidency, it has become unprecedentedly aggressive and malicious. White supremacists have been emboldened by this president. Near the top of his administration\u2019s target list of civil rights reversals […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":32,"featured_media":0,"menu_order":86,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kad_blocks_custom_css":"","_kad_blocks_head_custom_js":"","_kad_blocks_body_custom_js":"","_kad_blocks_footer_custom_js":"","footnotes":"","_members_access_role":[],"_members_access_error":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"issuem_issue":[90],"class_list":["post-245","article","type-article","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","issuem_issue-nlg-review-vol-74-no-2-summer-2017","post"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t