LexisNexis Is Selling Your Personal Data To ICE So It Can Try To Predict Crimes (theintercept.com) 43
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Intercept: The legal research and public records data broker LexisNexis is providing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement with tools to target people who may potentially commit a crime -- before any actual crime takes place, according to a contract document obtained by The Intercept. LexisNexis then allows ICE to track the purported pre-criminals' movements. The unredacted contract overview provides a rare look at the controversial $16.8 million agreement between LexisNexis and ICE, a federal law enforcement agency whose surveillance of and raids against migrant communities are widely criticized as brutal, unconstitutional, and inhumane.
"The purpose of this program is mass surveillance at its core," said Julie Mao, an attorney and co-founder of Just Futures Law, which is suing LexisNexis over allegations it illegally buys and sells personal data. Mao told The Intercept the ICE contract document, which she reviewed for The Intercept, is "an admission and indication that ICE aims to surveil individuals where no crime has been committed and no criminal warrant or evidence of probable cause." While the company has previously refused to answer any questions about precisely what data it's selling to ICE or to what end, the contract overview describes LexisNexis software as not simply a giant bucket of personal data, but also a sophisticated analytical machine that purports to detect suspicious activity and scrutinize migrants -- including their locations.
The document, a "performance of work statement" made by LexisNexis as part of its contract with ICE, was obtained by journalist Asher Stockler through a public records request and shared with The Intercept. LexisNexis Risk Solutions, a subsidiary of LexisNexis's parent company, inked the contract with ICE, a part of the Department of Homeland Security, in 2021. The document reveals that over 11,000 ICE officials, including within the explicitly deportation-oriented Enforcement and Removal Operations branch, were using LexisNexis as of 2021. "This includes supporting all aspects of ICE screening and vetting, lead development, and criminal analysis activities," the document says. In practice, this means ICE is using software to "automate" the hunt for suspicious-looking blips in the data, or links between people, places, and property. It is unclear how such blips in the data can be linked to immigration infractions or criminal activity, but the contract's use of the term "automate" indicates that ICE is to some extent letting computers make consequential conclusions about human activity. The contract further notes that the LexisNexis analysis includes "identifying potentially criminal and fraudulent behavior before crime and fraud can materialize." (ICE did not respond to a request for comment.) "LexisNexis Risk Solutions prides itself on the responsible use of data, and the contract with the Department of Homeland Security encompasses only data allowed for such uses," said LexisNexis spokesperson Jennifer Richman. She says the company's work with ICE doesn't violate the law or federal policy.
"The purpose of this program is mass surveillance at its core," said Julie Mao, an attorney and co-founder of Just Futures Law, which is suing LexisNexis over allegations it illegally buys and sells personal data. Mao told The Intercept the ICE contract document, which she reviewed for The Intercept, is "an admission and indication that ICE aims to surveil individuals where no crime has been committed and no criminal warrant or evidence of probable cause." While the company has previously refused to answer any questions about precisely what data it's selling to ICE or to what end, the contract overview describes LexisNexis software as not simply a giant bucket of personal data, but also a sophisticated analytical machine that purports to detect suspicious activity and scrutinize migrants -- including their locations.
The document, a "performance of work statement" made by LexisNexis as part of its contract with ICE, was obtained by journalist Asher Stockler through a public records request and shared with The Intercept. LexisNexis Risk Solutions, a subsidiary of LexisNexis's parent company, inked the contract with ICE, a part of the Department of Homeland Security, in 2021. The document reveals that over 11,000 ICE officials, including within the explicitly deportation-oriented Enforcement and Removal Operations branch, were using LexisNexis as of 2021. "This includes supporting all aspects of ICE screening and vetting, lead development, and criminal analysis activities," the document says. In practice, this means ICE is using software to "automate" the hunt for suspicious-looking blips in the data, or links between people, places, and property. It is unclear how such blips in the data can be linked to immigration infractions or criminal activity, but the contract's use of the term "automate" indicates that ICE is to some extent letting computers make consequential conclusions about human activity. The contract further notes that the LexisNexis analysis includes "identifying potentially criminal and fraudulent behavior before crime and fraud can materialize." (ICE did not respond to a request for comment.) "LexisNexis Risk Solutions prides itself on the responsible use of data, and the contract with the Department of Homeland Security encompasses only data allowed for such uses," said LexisNexis spokesperson Jennifer Richman. She says the company's work with ICE doesn't violate the law or federal policy.
Trolls? (Score:1)
This LexisNexis? They’re trolls of the highest order and we should respect them.
LexisNexis is the worst (Score:5, Informative)
Setting aside this issue, they've faced multiple class action action lawsuits regarding incorrect data supplied to lenders.
Re: (Score:3)
I think China does the social credit score better. At least when the Party blacklists you, you know why.
Re: LexisNexis is the worst (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They're not a credit bureau, they are a data aggregator. Credit info is just one product.
This would make a boring movie. (Score:2)
LexisNexis Is Selling Your Personal Data To ICE So It Can Try To Predict Crimes
This was in the initial plot of The Minority Report, but the Precogs line was more interesting.
And by "try to predict crime" (Score:1, Insightful)
I fear the police more than any criminal I've ever encountered in my life.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Julie Mao (Score:4, Funny)
Disband ICE and fire them all (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
ALPR (Score:2)
The linked article talks quite a bit about ALPR (automated license plate reader) and how that data is being accrued at "30 million new plate records monthly" by "traffic lights, cop cars, and anywhere else a small camera might fit". It is massive surveillance, but hard to know how this could realistically be restricted. I could easily make an ALPR system with a Raspberry Pi and associated very small camera for it that I have. There are online services that will do the lookups for you inexpensively. Perfectl
Re: (Score:3)
but hard to know how this could realistically be restricted.
Simple. Congress could pass a law banning collection and sale of such data. (Interstate commerce clause) They could also go the EU's route and set up something similar to the GDPR. (Which they might end up doing anyway given how badly they want data on EU citizens....)
INB4 "Supreme Court": Congress can also amend such bill to say "No court shall have permission to review or issue rulings on the constitutionality of this law." Congress could also claim National Security / Terrorism (after all collecting d
Re: (Score:2)
I applaud your sentiment and agree that digital privacy laws should be improved, but if pretty much anyone can make an ALPR scanner and get the lookups almost for free it may not be feasible to outlaw. Many other things about you can simply be scraped from public records, credit agencies, and your social media history. These companies are merely in the business of aggregating and packaging data that's largely already available.
What lawmakers could potentially do is prohibit ICE from buying and abusing the d
Re: (Score:3)
"Unfortunately, anything to do with policing immigration has been radicalized by the GOP and will not pass in Congress."
On the contrary, I think the GOP is more than down for finally policing illegal immigration. You not only seem opposed to that but actually seem to want to make doing so more difficult and less effective and yet don't realize THAT is a radical and crazy position. One the TFS seems to share, these people already broke the law upon breaking and entering the country and continue to trespass e
Re: (Score:2)
That would violate the separation of powers.
Nope it doesn't. The Supreme Court's job is to make judgments based on the laws passed by Congress.
The Supreme Court gave itself the authority to rule on constitutionality of legislation passed by Congress (Marbury v. Madison) [wikipedia.org], but Congress is responsible for determining the content of said constitution.
There's absolutely nothing that would prohibit Congress from passing legislation explicitly ordering the Supreme Court to stand down. On the contrary, it would violate the separation of powers for the S
Re: (Score:2)
Actually the supreme court recognized its authority to rule on the Constitutionality of law. The Constitution did not limit its authority to pass judgements in any fashion.
"The Supreme Court's job is to make judgments based on the laws passed by Congress."
The Supreme Court is not limited to basing their judgements on law passed by Congress.
"Congress is responsible for determining the content of said constitution."
False. The Constitution is the origin of the congressional legislative power, not the other way
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say "policing illegal immigration". I'm talking about the act of policing OF immigration, which has been plagued with widespread abuses. From the article; “This begins to look a lot like indiscriminate, warrantless real-time surveillance capabilities for ICE with respect to any vehicle encountered by any agent in any context.” Clearly an abuse of power.
The GOP constantly engages in fearmongering about immigration and characterizes immigrants as rapists, murderers, and drug dealers. Any
Re: (Score:2)
"I didn't say "policing illegal immigration". I'm talking about the act of policing OF immigration"
Yes. That was the basis of my comment. It is illegal immigration that is need of policing, not policing the police as you suggest.
Re: (Score:2)
The linked article clearly describes the excesses of the ICE and the danger it presents to all of us. You are welcome to ignore that and focus on an entirely different topic but it seems willfully ignorant to me.
Re: (Score:2)
"The GOP constantly engages in fearmongering about immigration and characterizes immigrants as rapists, murderers, and drug dealers."
This sounds like the deliberate misquote of Trump misinformation that legacy media loved spreading around and despite having since buried retractions love to keep referencing.
There are extremely high rates of rape, murder, and drug smuggling which come hand-in-hand with illegal immigration and the cartels which facilitate it. Much of this is criminal-on-criminal but it all end
Re: (Score:2)
On the contrary, I think the GOP is more than down for finally policing illegal immigration. You not only seem opposed to that but actually seem to want to make doing so more difficult and less effective and yet don't realize THAT is a radical and crazy position. One the TFS seems to share, these people already broke the law upon breaking and entering the country and continue to trespass each day they stay.
There's the problem. You're so radicalized that you don't realize that, up until the GOP became radicalized about this, undocumented border crossing was just a civil infraction. That's the way it was and has been worldwide for quite some time except in repressive security states or countries at war. It's just one big circular argument with you people: why is crossing the border undocumented so terrible? Answer: because it's a severely punishable crime. Why is it a crime? answer, because it's such a terrible
Re: (Score:2)
"It's just one big circular argument with you people: why is crossing the border undocumented so terrible?"
Because there is a legal process for coming into the country that at least makes some effort to ensure you understand our values, are loyal, verifies your background, have legitimate employment, have legitimate identification which can't be used to vote, and can support yourself financially. Millions do it and they are welcome, it isn't exactly hard to get into the US legally... it is certainly easier
Re: (Score:2)
Because there is a legal process for coming into the country that at least makes some effort to ensure you understand our values, are loyal, verifies your background, have legitimate employment, have legitimate identification which can't be used to vote, and can support yourself financially. Millions do it and they are welcome...
See, this is the premise you start with, but it's a lie. What actually happens is that you people claim to be only against illegal immigration, but you constantly, constantly do everything you can to discourage legal immigration and make it harder and criminalize it. You criminalize it and then you turn around and say, with a straight face, that you're only opposed to criminal behavior.
Re:ALPR (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a mandatory 5-year prison sentence for aiding and abetting illegal crossings or harboring illegal aliens. There are entire city councils guilty of violating that law, yet they go unpunished. There are so-called charities breaking this law with impunity, as are actual agents of the Federal government. That is a radical departure from tradition, Law, reason, the Constitution, and any sane concept of justice.
Re: (Score:2)
There are and should be limitations on what ICE can do. In this case they appear to be putting literally everyone in the US under surveillance. That's certainly not within their purview.
Re: (Score:2)
I think we all know that "conservative" is just a label. They're obviously not really conservative or, where they are, they're only "conservative" about certain very specific things. They are, in fact, quite radical. If they were really conservative, for example, There would not be a mandatory 5 year prison sentence for aiding and abetting illegal crossings or harboring illegal aliens, because those laws are new and not the way it has traditionally been done.
Minority, something, something (Score:3)
I'm sure a saw a movie about this, the name Phillip K Dick comes to mind.
Yep, the movie had this, too.
Great, no more crooked CxOs committing white-collar crimes. That's its purpose, right, to find rich criminals?
Given the fact that... (Score:2)
...we're still having mass shootings on an almost daily basis, I can tell you it's not working. Give me my data back you sons of bitches.
Of course, I'm sure this only exists to prevent crime against rich people, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
Stop inserting radical political BS. (Score:2)
So what if radical left-wing activists lie about immigration law and enforcement? Why not instead say, "...widely criticized by a small number of political extremists"? It's equally accurate.
Face It. We've Lost (Score:2)
The government won't care. They know there's enough violent morons throwing "back the blue" flags that any resistance will be quashed by those citizens. They erode all of our constitutional rights except the right to own guns. They remove our protection on the guise of keeping people safe.
Realize that no government wants a true democracy, that's why we don't have one. Anyone in a position of power will only seek to consolidate that power to themselves.
In my state...the courts ruled the 4th only applies to y
trivially done (Score:2)
90% of crime is committed by people who have previously been convicted of crimes. I don't think you need to look at their google search histories, or how many cufflinks they buy.