For decades, law enforcement agencies have used surveillance as a tool to monitor and control Black communities in the United States. From the FBI’s COINTELPRO program in the 1950s and 60s, which sought to undermine civil rights activists, to modern-day social media tracking, Black people remain disproportionately targeted by police surveillance.
A recent report by the Innocence Project highlights how contemporary policing methods—particularly the use of social media, facial recognition, and data-mining technologies—continue to criminalize Black people. According to the report, “police surveillance of Black people in America is as old as policing itself.” It argues that these practices are not only discriminatory but also violate constitutional rights and perpetuate wrongful convictions.
This article explores the historical roots of police surveillance, the current technological advancements in monitoring, and the legal and social implications of these practices.
Historical Roots: COINTELPRO and the Surveillance of Black Activists
Surveillance of Black communities by law enforcement has a long history in the U.S. One of the most infamous programs was COINTELPRO (Counterintelligence Program), which was launched by the FBI in 1956. Under the direction of J. Edgar Hoover, COINTELPRO targeted Black civil rights leaders and organizations, including:
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. – The FBI harassed King with wiretaps and attempted to coerce him into suicide by sending him anonymous letters.
The Black Panther Party – The group was labeled a threat to national security, leading to FBI infiltration, disinformation campaigns, and assassinations, such as the killing of Fred Hampton in 1969.
Malcolm X – Under constant government surveillance, Malcolm X was subjected to FBI informants embedded within his organization.
According to the Innocence Project, “COINTELPRO sought to neutralize the civil rights movement by spreading disinformation, fabricating criminal charges, and violently suppressing activists.” These tactics laid the foundation for modern surveillance methods, many of which continue to disproportionately target Black communities.
The Evolution of Police Surveillance
While COINTELPRO officially ended in 1971, its legacy lives on in contemporary policing. Today, law enforcement agencies have turned to digital surveillance tools, such as:
Social Media Monitoring. Social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat are now regularly monitored by police.
According to the Innocence Project: “Law enforcement agencies across the U.S. have used fake social media accounts to befriend and track Black users, often without a warrant.”
The New York Police Department (NYPD) has been found using fake profiles to monitor Black Lives Matter activists.
In Baltimore, police used social media data to predict and suppress protests after the 2015 killing of Freddie Gray.
The FBI’s “Black Identity Extremist” classification (introduced in 2017) specifically used social media to track activists involved in racial justice movements.
Facial Recognition Technology. Facial recognition is one of the most controversial tools in modern policing, largely because of its racial bias and high error rates. Studies have found that these systems are significantly more likely to misidentify Black individuals compared to white individuals.
This has led to multiple wrongful arrests, including the high-profile cases of Robert Williams in Detroit (2020) and Nijeer Parks in New Jersey (2019).
Moreover, they are used without consent, often by scanning images from driver’s licenses, security cameras, and even social media.
According to the Innocence Project, “facial recognition software is frequently inaccurate, yet it is being used as a primary tool for arresting Black men.”
Predictive Policing and Data Mining. Predictive policing uses historical crime data to predict where future crimes may occur, but these systems reinforce racial bias because they rely on data collected from already over-policed Black neighborhoods.
The LAPD’s PredPol system was shut down in 2020 after it was found to disproportionately send police to Black and Latino neighborhoods.
In Chicago, the police department’s “Strategic Subject List” targeted individuals based on gang affiliations and social media activity, often flagging innocent Black youth as potential criminals.
The Innocence Project notes:“Predictive policing does not prevent crime—it merely increases the presence of police in Black communities, leading to more racial profiling and wrongful arrests.”
Wrongful Convictions and the Role of Surveillance
One of the most concerning aspects of modern police surveillance is its role in wrongful convictions. Because of flawed algorithms, social media misinterpretations, and biased data collection, innocent Black individuals are more likely to be arrested and convicted based on inaccurate or manipulated surveillance evidence.
The Central Park Five (1989) – Police coerced false confessions from five Black and Latino teenagers, using surveillance-based narratives to frame them.
Michael Williams (2020) – Arrested for murder based on a faulty gunshot detection system, later proven unreliable.
Robert Julian-Borchak Williams (2020) – Misidentified by facial recognition software, leading to a wrongful arrest for a crime he did not commit.
According to the report: “Black people are more likely to be wrongfully convicted of crimes they did not commit due to biased policing and flawed surveillance technology.”
Legal and Ethical Concerns
Violation of Fourth Amendment Rights: The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures, but many police surveillance tactics operate in legal gray areas.
For example, the report found warrantless social media monitoring is often justified under vague “public safety” claims. Facial recognition scans are often used without consent or notification. Moreover, predictive policing databases are built without public oversight.
Racial Bias in Law Enforcement Technology: Research has consistently shown that surveillance tools amplify systemic racism rather than eliminating it. A 2019 study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) found that facial recognition software is up to 100 times more likely to misidentify Black individuals than white individuals.
Mass Data Collection and Civil Liberties. The use of artificial intelligence (AI), predictive algorithms, and geolocation tracking has raised concerns about mass data collection and privacy violations.
Critics argue that law enforcement lacks transparency in how data is collected and used. Further, there are few legal restrictions on how long police can store surveillance data. Finally, these methods create “permanent digital records” that can be used against individuals indefinitely.
Calls for Reform
Advocates and civil rights organizations, including the Innocence Project, are calling for stronger oversight and legal restrictions on police surveillance. Recommended reforms include:
- Banning or limiting facial recognition use by law enforcement.
- Regulating social media monitoring to prevent warrantless tracking.
- Ending predictive policing programs that reinforce racial biases.
- Increasing transparency in how police collect and store surveillance data.
- Holding law enforcement accountable for wrongful arrests linked to surveillance errors.
From COINTELPRO to modern-day digital surveillance, law enforcement agencies have historically used technology to target and suppress Black communities. While these tools are often justified as crime prevention measures, they disproportionately harm innocent individuals and perpetuate wrongful convictions.
The Innocence Project warns: “Without oversight, police surveillance will continue to violate civil rights and disproportionately harm Black people.”
As technology advances, it is critical to push for reforms that protect privacy, ensure due process, and prevent further injustice. The fight against racially biased surveillance is not just about technology—it is about civil rights and justice for all.
