UIC Law Open Access Repository

Yamada, David C.

English

Designing Trauma-Informed Legislation: Drafting the Workplace Bullying Accountability Act

Woodard, Kenneth L., Jr.

Catch-22: The Elusiveness of Commuted Per-Unit Royalty Conversions and Their Sufficiency in Hypothetical Negotiation Calculations Under Protective Order

Prager, Nathan W.

Giannetta, Teyah S.

Burke, Janice L.

Miller, Monica K.

Do Plea Bargains Advance Justice? A Content Analysis of Judges’ Perceptions of Plea Bargaining

Garrido, Jose M.

Kilborn, Jason J

Rosha, Anjum

Personal Insolvency and Data Collection Systems

Hulbert, Jacob

A Message on Status: How 303 Creative Undermines the Distinction Between Status and Message Discrimination

UIC Law Review 
Volume 58 Issue 4 Article 2 
2025 
Table of Contents 
Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview 
Recommended Citation 
Table of Contents, 58 UIC L. Rev. (2025) 
https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol58/iss4/2 
This Front Matter is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been 
accepted for inclusion in UIC Law Review by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access Repository. For 
more information, please contact law-reference@uic.edu. 
UIC LAW REVIEW 
VOLUME 58 SUMMER 2025 ISSUE 4 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 
ARTICLES 
 
The Second Amendment and Heller’s “Sensitive Places” Carve-Out 
Post-Rahimi: A Historiography, Analysis, and Basic Framework 
 ........................................................................ Patrick J. Charles 813 
 
Do Plea Bargains Advance Justice? A Content Analysis of Judges’ 
Perceptions of Plea Bargaining .... Nathan W. Prager, Teyah S. 
Giannetta, Janice L. Burke, & Monica K. Miller                           899 
 
Choosing a Jury on Mars 
 .................................................... Karl T. Muth & Jodi N. Beggs 929 
 
 
COMMENTS 
 
The Right to Be Heard ....................................... Skylar Nafziger 953 
Can Your State Stop You From Traveling to Another State for 
Abortion Care? ............................................................ Roxy Freel 989 
 
Why Not Both? How Social Surrogacy Can Further Women’s Rights
 ................................................................................... Anita Saliu 1017 


Bess, Megan

Straight from the Students: The Impact of Law School Experiences on Professional Identity Formation

Judge David Davis was one of Abraham Lincoln\u27s strongest and most effective allies. He was instrumental in securing Lincoln\u27s presidential nomination at the 1860 Republican National Convention. This pivotal moment in history stemmed from a long-standing friendship between the two men. Additionally, this event significantly influenced Davis\u27s career, as Lincoln appointed him to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1862.https://repository.law.uic.edu/facbooks/1039/thumbnail.jp

McKoski, Raymond J.

David Davis, Abraham Lincoln\u27s Favorite Judge

Dávila, Sarah

UIC School of Law 
UIC Law Open Access Repository 
UIC Law White Papers 
2024 
Chicago Must End the Use of ShotSpotter to Protect Human 
Rights 
Sarah Dávila 
Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/whitepapers 
 Part of the Law Commons 
Recommended Citation 
Chicago Must End the Use of ShotSpotter to Protect Human Rights,Sarah A. Dávila 
https://repository.law.uic.edu/whitepapers/31 
This White paper is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been 
accepted for inclusion in UIC Law White Papers by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access 
Repository. For more information, please contact law-reference@uic.edu. 
International Human  
Rights Clinic 
 
 
 
Chicago Must End the Use of ShotSpotter to 
Protect Human Rights 
ShotSpotter Claims it Accurately Records Gunshot Audio; Study Proves 
Otherwise 
ShotSpotter is a sound detection system that listens for gunshots, identifies their location, and then, 
after internal verification by artificial intelligence and experts, notifies the police so they can respond.1 
The technology itself records all audio and filters it to only gunshots; however, all audio that is 
captured is stored.2  
 
ShotSpotter does not work in urban settings. Skyscrapers and noises that mimic gunfire affect 
accuracy.3 ShotSpotter has interpreted cars backfiring and dogs barking as gunshots.4 According to a 
study by the MacArthur Justice Center at Northwestern Law, of all ShotSpotter deployments by CPD, 
“89% turned up no gun-related crime and 86% led to no report of any crime at all.”5 This surveillance 
led to more than 40,000 dead-end deployments.6 When officers are deployed based on ShotSpotter, 
“it creates a powder keg situation for residents who just happen to be in the vicinity of a false 
alert.”7 This is a threat to privacy; the technology’s inability to differentiate between gunshots and day-
to-day noises leads to over policing of areas with ShotSpotter technology. 
The Chicago Police Department Uses ShotSpotter to Surveille Black and Brown 
Neighborhoods 
The Chicago Police Department (CPD) uses ShotSpotter as a form of surveillance.8 The City has one 
of the largest contracts for ShotSpotter, having signed a three-year contract worth $23 million in August 
2018 and renewed it in August 2021.9 The sensors are now deployed over 117 square miles of the 
City, spanning 12 police districts.10 
 
ShotSpotter has led to over policing in “high-crime” neighborhoods.11 Although there is no definition 
for “high-crime” neighborhoods, the City has placed ShotSpotter only in neighborhoods with primarily 
Black and Brown residents.12 ShotSpotter devices were first installed in Englewood, with a 
demographic that was 94.6% Black as of 2019.13 Chicago later expanded ShotSpotter deployment 
into 12 of the city’s 22 districts, all in neighborhoods that are primarily Black and Brown.14 
ShotSpotter claims their technology detects ninety percent of gunfire in service areas; as a result police 
activity has skyrocketed in these areas since installation.15 With ShotSpotter classifying dogs barking 
as gunshots, CPD can now consider anyone occupying public space as a suspect for a non-existent 
crime. 
The Use of ShotSpotter to Surveille Black and Brown Neighborhoods is a 
violation of basic human rights 
The use of ShotSpotter by law enforcement to surveille and suppress Black and Brown individuals and 
communities is a violation of the human rights to nondiscrimination and privacy protected by 
international human rights law.16 All persons have the right to be free from discrimination based on 
race, color, sex, national origin, language, religion, political or other opinion.17 Racial discrimination 
includes the “distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, color, descent, or national 
or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing” the exercise of human rights.18 
 
Additionally, when law enforcement agencies hinder a person’s privacy rights by interfering with their 
private information, they violate their human right to privacy.19 A 2018 study of an acoustic gunshot 
detection system found that although gunshot incidents increased by 259% after implementation, 
“there was not a significant increase in the number of confirmed shootings.”20 The technology led to 
police frequently being dispatched to Black and Brown neighborhoods and given the authority to stop 
anyone within the vicinity of a ShotSpotter alert.21 All kinds of audio, that is not any kind of a public 
safety threat, is recorded and stored.22 All people living in neighborhoods with ShotSpotter installed 
are at risk of CPD over policing under the guise of investigating a ShotSpotter alert.23 CPD using this 
technology to surveille citizens is a brazen violation of the ICCPR, and the City of Chicago must end 
the ShotSpotter contract to protect human rights.24 
 
The #StopShotSpotter Campaign Demands the City to Stop the Use of 
ShotSpotter 
The #StopShotSpotter campaign emerged in July of 2021 to protest Chicago’s renewal of the $10 
million per year contract with ShotSpotter.25 The campaign highlights that ShotSpotter is ineffective, 
expensive, and racist. The audio surveillance technology is used by the Chicago Police Department 
to further police and surveille mostly Black and Latinx communities.26 “It fails to perform its stated 
purpose of reducing gun violence, and instead has cost Chicago $33 million, over 20,000 dead-end 
CPD deployments a year, and heightened and even fatal police presence in Chicago’s Black & Latinx 
neighborhoods.”27 The campaign’s powerful slogan is, “Why invest in ShotSpotter, when you can 
invest in us?”28 
 
Contact: 
 
Sarah Dávila-Ruhaak  
Director  
International Human Rights Clinic 
300 S. State Street 
Chicago, Illinois 60604 
(312) 360-2654 
sdavila@uic.edu 
 
 
 
1 Interview with Joey Cavise & Richard Gutierrez. (February 22, 2021) (notes on file, University of Illinois 
at Chicago’s Law School’s International Human Rights Clinic) [Cavise & Gutierrez interview]. 
2 Id. 
3 Id. 
4 Id. 
5 Patrick Elwood, Study: ShotSpotter technology led to over 40k dead-end CPD deployments in 21 
months, WGNtv (May 3, 2021) https://wgntv.com/news/chicago-news/study-shotspotter-technology-led-
to-over-40k-dead-end-cpd-deployments-in-21-months/. 
6 Id. 
7 Id. 
8 Benjamin Goodman, ShotSpotter- The New Tool to Degrade What is Left of the Fourth Amendment 54 
UIC L. Rev. 797 (2021) [ShotSpotter – The New Tool]. 
9 Press Release, SHOTSPOTTER, Chicago Signs $23 Million Multi-year Agreement With ShotSpotter to 
Extend Gunshot Detection Coverage into the Next Decade (Sep. 5, 2018). 
 
https://www.shotspotter.com/press-releases/chicago-signs-23-million-multi-year-agreement-with-
shotspotter-to-extend-gunshot-detection-coverage-into-next-decade/ 
10 Goodman, supra note 8. 
11 Id. 
12 Id. 
13 Englewood: Community Data Snapshot, June 2020, CHICAGO METRO. AGENCY FOR PLANNING, 1, 
3 (June 2020), www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/10180/126764/Englewood.pdf[perma.cc/QQM5-ANJG]. 
14 Reduce Gun Crime with Proven Gunshot Detection Technology, SHOTSPOTTER INC., 
www.shotspotter.com/law-enforcement/gunshot-detection/[perma.cc/QK5E-7W6N] 
15 Gabriel Sandoval & Rachel Holliday Smith, ‘ShotSpotter’ Tested As Shootings And Fireworks Soar, 
While Civil Rights Questions Linger, THE CITY (July 5, 2020), 
www.thecity.nyc/2020/7/5/21312671/shotspotter-nyc-shootings- fireworks-nypd-civil-rights 
[perma.cc/NY7W-LB8Z]. 
16 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Art. 26, Dec. 16, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171 
[ICCPR]. 
17 ICCPR, Art. 26; “The [International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights] is a key international human 
rights treaty, providing a range of protections for civil and political rights. The ICCPR, together with the 
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural 
Rights, are considered the International Bill of Human Rights. The ICCPR obligates countries that have 
ratified the treaty to protect and preserve basic human rights, such as: the right to life and human dignity; 
equality before the law; freedom of speech, assembly, and association; religious freedom and privacy; 
freedom from torture, ill-treatment, and arbitrary detention; gender equality; the right to a fair trial; right 
family life and family unity; and minority rights.” ACLU, FAQ: The Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 
(ICCPR), (April 2019), https://www.aclu.org/other/faq-covenant-civil-political-rights-iccpr.  
18 International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Art. 1., Jan. 4, 1965, 
660 U.N.T.S. 195. 
19 ICCPR, Art. 26 
20 Jerry H. Ratcliffe et al., A Partially Randomized Field Experiment On The Effect Of An Acoustic 
Gunshot Detection System On Police Incident Reports, 15 J. EXPERIMENTAL CRIM. 67, 68 (2018).  
21 Goodman, supra note 8. 
22 Cavise & Gutierrez interview, supra note 1. 
23 Goodman, supra note 8. 
24 ICCPR, Art. 26 
25 The StopShotSpotter Campaign, Stop ShotSpotter, https://www.soapboxpo.com/stop-shotspotter.html, 
(October 27, 2021) 
26 Id. 
27 Id. 
28 Id. 


Chicago Must End the Use of ShotSpotter to Protect Human Rights

Schwinn, Steven D.

Can the Government Impose a Set and Predetermined Fee on a Landowner Who Seeks to Develop His Property, Based Only on the Location of the Property and the Type of Development, without an Individualized Assessment of the Development\u27s Public Costs?

Not a member yet