Understanding the Nexus Between Technology and Public Trust in Law Enforcement

The rapid expansion of modern technology has influenced virtually all parts of the human experience. As American society has become increasingly technological, so too have American institutions of governance. In 2022, surveillance technologies have become nearly ubiquitous nationwide, with law enforcement agencies among the most significant beneficiaries.[1] And while technological developments may often feel self-propelling and out of reach, state and local leaders remain uniquely positioned to safeguard the public’s privacy interests against unfettered police surveillance.

The uncertaintiessurrounding police agencies’ use of novel technology span far beyond classifications of race, religion, sexual orientation, and socio-economic status.[2] Given the extensive breadth of this issue, it is imperative that local governments be decidedly cautious when commissioning the use ofuntried technologiesfor law enforcement purposes. [3] Still, to understand the impact of technology on policing in America, local leaders must acknowledge a collateral consequence of police misusing such technology: the public’s diminished sense of trust and legitimacy in law enforcement agencies.[4]

Recent studies on the public’s trust in local law enforcement agencies have yielded disconcerting results. [5] Today, most Americans indicate that they do not see an adequate representation of their values reflected in law enforcement.[6] However, law enforcement agencies are not alone in experiencing this increased skepticism. Instead, Americans have also expressed similar distrust for the tech industry.[7]And while technologyis often considered to be neither moral nor immoral on its own, the use of technology by law enforcement agencies can determine whether it yields promising or harmful results.[8]

“Citizens are less likely to obey the law when they do not view law enforcement agencies as legitimate or trustworthy”

Many police agencies have argued that new technologies allow them to connect more efficiently with their communities. [9] For instance, some police departments use social media to facilitate public discourse and mend the schism between themselves and the communities they serve.[10]Other departments attempt to improve officer transparency and public accountability by enforcing strict body-worn camera policies.[11]For example, in California, the Rialto City Police Department reported a 59 percent decrease in citizen complaints about officers’ use of force after adopting a rigid body-worn camera policy for its officers.[12]

Yet, despite these ostensible benefits, there is no demonstrable connection between police departments’ use of social media and increased levels of community trust. Similarly, peer-reviewed studies have found that body-worn cameras have no discernible effect on police use of force.[13]In fact, research suggests that the increased use oftechnology by police departments often intensifiesthe community’s distrust toward the police. [14]Accordingly,while modern technology may present opportunities to increase police transparency with the public,it is by no means a panacea.

Overall, when government institutions do not act in accordance with the public’s interests, perceptions of trust and legitimacy in those institutions begin to decrease.[15] This truism is perhaps most consequential in the context of law enforcement, as citizens are less likely to obey the law when they do not view law enforcement agencies as legitimate or trustworthy.[16]Thus, to improve community-police relations, local governments must recognize the collateral consequences of increased police surveillance. Moreover, state and local leaders should embrace their unique opportunity to mitigate these risks by enacting policies that impose sensible boundaries on police use of novel technologies.