in a way, with the data moving to the cloud computing, that we can see it as being for siebel in the future. i don't have any empirical evidence of this but i think one of the major drivers of ecpa reform is this very notion that it is being kept in the club a third party service providers and no longer be maintained locally on people's computers. ..

base of two is the word take action against the providers that refuse to comply with requests because of the act? >> we have not in deference to the ongoing discussions by the reform that's what i would say is we are seeking more protection than in the current. it allows the administrators to obtain notice to the subscriber what we are proposing is some sort of a judicial proceeding where we would obtain a court

order and you used the term court order is essentially what the warrant is which is a judge signing off. as a subscriber unlike a warrant which is export a subscriber can come in and assert any objection to what we are proposing is actually more protection than in the current statute. >> i do with all due respect. >> i appreciate the respect. >> thank you mr. chair and the acting ranking member. i also want to wish a happy birthday in advance i think you are celebrating the 32nd anniversary of your birthday tomorrow. [laughter]

>> i want to ask a question i will start a discussion here i'm concerned with your efforts when it involved the isp that is sent within the u.s. jurisdiction in the efforts that we would have here to strengthen the ability to get information for the u.s. domiciles and the potential risk that could have for people that they intend to use those for the kind of purposes that you are going after what risk do we have going beyond just the 180 day retention requirement and clarifying the obligation to the isp with respect to the requirements what risk do we have of just having the stakes

go to another pastor and still be able to do what they want to accomplish and i will open it up to the panel. we will start down there. scenic thank you for that question. when there are providers that are doing business in the u.s. historically the courts have exercised jurisdiction over those individuals. the >> what is your experience? >> in order to get something that needs to be the basis for jurisdiction and one of the things that concerns us about proposal is making the data where there are people even in the u.s. unable to use traditional legal process to compile that information that they may store to come back to the united states.

>> the commission has undertaken a position on the act and i think it is fair to say that we would have difficulties on the civil side as well as now if we try to compel information that doesn't have a presence in the united states. >> as long as there is another place in the glow of the internet infrastructure is a global infrastructure subject of several jurisdictions and how we balance the power so we are not tying the hands of businesses here we will let you to comment.

>> it is an issue that needs to be looked at carefully. >> that subpoena frequently falls short of getting the evidence they want because oftentimes the targets seem to delete the information was working for congress what is working for congress right now to help address that issue what do we have to look at to have that tool available? >> we are leaking tv for seeking limited authority like the ones that you cited where individuals have deleted e-mails or was not produced to ask under a standard we would need to meet so they could come in an object and about is limited authority that we are seeking and the idea isn't to circumstances like the one you suggested for the

individual deleted the e-mails were able to obtain it and what that would that little citizens and to the people that are producing e-mails pursuant because if they know we can go into further incentivizes them to provide us with their full e-mail. >> who have all the tools you need to get after people that may be doing things we don't want them to do and on the other hand we are talking of extending these capabilities to agencies but this would extend to agencies that have more capabilities than we already have so we've got to work on making sure we have the right kind of controls in place as we move forward in the policy. thank you mr. chair thank you

for your leadership and asking the appropriate questions and having an opportunity to discuss this. those officers have been involved in law enforcement for a long time are very well aware of what sounds like some good theoretical idea that could have an impact on the united states to have water, to avoid. i've ordered a publication not long ago and i don't know how many more. different kinds of publications of a similar nature so somebody is sharing information all over. president obama was wisely congratulated for his ability to

target because they knew all kinds of things about him where they went fishing. all these things somehow is available for the private sectors and political candidates and we have to be sure that we are not placing too much of a burden on law enforcement as they try to do their duty to the i think we've got to be careful about this. i'm glad the chairman is looking at this and we are asking the law enforcement i've talked to they have certain problems we ought to deal with in the legislation. one is a delay between the issue of the request to the actual production of the documents. number two, we ought to consider what happens if you have these documents within hours and days

is that appropriate? we don't allow that in the records as i understand in third it is critical anybody that has been involved in law enforcement i can imagine in an investigation particularly you've got to be able to effectively not tell the suspect that you're on to. the fbi subpoenaed your records and they flee the country and hide other evidence that should be available. those requests need to be considered. you can issue the subpoena for the record that has the persons name, address, the length of the phone calls.

is that correct? >> yes that's correct. >> and with an administrative subpoena so can the irs without even asking a prosecutor's approval. what about getting an e-mail address? it seems that is a difference between just getting who the person has been e-mailing as opposed to the content of the e-mail cannot be obtained and why should we enhance the significant ability to get that information. >> thank you for that question. the standard is currently different. the department does support equalizing the standards and bringing them in so that you can use the same standards that we

have been using for traditional telecommunications like telephone records to obtain the material as well. >> that is a huge thing and a lot of investigations that if somebody says i've never met this person and they've got 15 or 25 phone calls i didn't talk to them on the day and then there's 25 phone calls that they. it beats the hugely important and protecting the american people from criminals then you've got the standard for content. a court order isn't much different from a search warrant. so you have a little less for the older e-mail content is that correct? is that the first context you get through the 120 days and

older? >> under the current statute, we cannot obtain them through an administrative subpoena that goes to the subscriber. but as i said in terms of an amendment to that we would support a judicial proceeding to the notice that requires us to obtain those e-mails. >> you can request the confidentiality. >> we are not seeking the authority to no notice notice about your general practice is to first seek them from the subscriber. and if we do not obtain e-mails than to go to this mechanism. we recognize there are important privacy interests and we are trying to accommodate them for the ability for us to obtain an appropriate circumstance of the consequence of the e-mail. >> i think that we've got to be careful about not having an ability to protect against

disclosure for the person because i don't -- that's not true in other areas that you can get a nondisclosure or it can be critical. if you are investigating a terrorist and they know you are onto them, it could be life and death. >> thanks to the panel. i appreciate it very much and we will be in touch with you for follow-up questions. i would like to call the second panel now. i want to introduce them to richard come his assistant special agent in charge tennessee bureau of investigation's technical service unit, special agent little hail is responsible for coordinating the use of

technology in support of law enforcement operations including using communication records and the support of criminal investigations. he testifies on behalf of the association of state criminal investigating agencies. he received his bachelor's degree from bowdoin college and the law degree at vanderbilt. second is richard. he worked at google answers is a special counsel and commuter crime and intellectual property section doj. he has also been a law professor at stanford georgetown, george mason and received his undergraduate degree at the university of new mexico, law degree yale.

next is chris calbrese vice president of the center for democracy and technology. before joining the cdt, he worked as the website of consul at the american civil liberties union and close the console at the massachusetts senate majority leader. mr. calabrese graduate from georgetown. finally, victoria espinel of the software alliance which advocates on behalf of software industry before governance. she has previously served for over a decade in the white house under both republican and democrat administrations including been nominated to be the first u.s. intellectual property enforcement coordinator she graduated from georgetown school refund service and has an

lol and from the london school of economics and a law degree from georgetown. we want to thank all of you for appearing in the student order of business that you are seated. >> senator and members of the committee thank you for inviting me to testify. i'm a technical investigator and i serve on the technology committee and i'm pleased to speak on behalf of the local and personal officers. the work of the majority of the investigations in the country to share the perspective of the challenges. the challenge of also access to electronic evidence is the top of mind every my everyday for those of us in the trenches and while we agree the wall should be updated any efforts to reform should also reflect its twofold aim of assuring the law-enforcement ability of

obtained evidence authorized to do so. i have three points for consideration this morning. first we have some concerns about the pending legislation. it might be time to protect additional content with the probable cause standard and this bill creates greater protection for the digital content and for the letter at someone's house. bringing it into balance with the physical and digital world on the same plane not favor digital evidence over physical evidence. the provisions in the middle seem one-sided. it's hard for investigators to understand why there are no requirements to notice how providers respond to the demand for evidence that we should be required to notify customers the records have been opting as quickly as three to ten days for the processing we urge the committee to carefully balance the need for the notification against the resource places. time spent complying with arbitration in line for notice and the investigative crimes into digital evidence is a factor. we also have grave concerns about the challenges that we have been very vocal about and

which of the decision doesn't address whatever legal standards to the content of the public is a powerful interest in law-enforcement ability to get that information once we can comply with the law. the non-technical barriers and lack of consistent framework governing service provider responds slow the efforts as much as possible in the standard of proof. whatever standard of proof you decide is appropriate we also also ensure law-enforcement can access the evidence we need reliably and quickly. it's posing any structure to the legal demand. some respond quickly and others don't. this is problematic in emergencies and it also prevents us from efficiently processing large volumes of leads for missing and exploited children that might contain clues to the location of a child being victimized with pages of online ads that could hide sex

trafficking victims. there may be an emergency we can't know about it until we get routine response from the service providers. speed is important in all investigations. requirements for automated exchange in the legal process from service providers should be considered. it could provide a great deal of transparency the access to records. the governing access to the emergency records should be revised and have access to a life-threatening emergency but it isn't that isn't always the reality. the provision of today is voluntary for the providers not mandatory. even when emergency access is granted there is no guarantee we will get the records immediately. in some cases we can't even get someone on the phone and a provider has chosen never to provide evidence in the absence of the legal process no matter the circumstances. in an effort to inform the committee i solicited feedback on the barriers from a wide

range of agencies, specialties and investigative focuses. the replies_the investigations regarding routine turnaround times from some providers that are measured in months, the inability to speak to his human being about a timely manner and uneven access to the records in emergencies and talked about the providers that routinely litigate the legal process and instead of leaving that to the court have legal documents without complaining because they used the terms the provider prefers regardless whether the terms are legally required. we appreciate the current bill requiring us to look at those issues and hope they find a way to tell the stories. these are the day-to-day realities on the crime scene. the public never hears about these things. they investigate the crimes and need congress to understand and think about the implications and possible solutions. i want to reemphasize how important those aspects are to the nation's criminal investigators. you are well aware of the role

in balancing public privacy and safety and we also depend on it as a critical tool and a set of rules on how we contained the digital evidence and it's a key to an ever-increasing number of cases ever increasing number of cases and we urge the committee to balance both of the goals as we work to get espa right for the 21st century. thank you for having me and i look forward to your questions. >> chairman grassley, ranking member and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. my name is richard salgado and i'm director of law enforcement information security. i've received the company compliance with governmental class for user's data including requests made pursuant to the communications privacy act 1986. in the past i've worked on issues as the senior counsel in the computer crime and intellectual property section and the department of justice created google strongly supports 356 the amendments act of 2015 which currently has 23

cosponsors now there are 200 cosponsors more than any other bill pending in congress. it's undeniable and it's not surprising that there are strong interests in the aligning of the first fourth amendment and the user's reasonable expectations of privacy. the original disclosure set out back in 1986 was given the technology that existed at the time and in 2015 the rules no longer make sense. they have the same for the amendment protections they do in the when the government launched and entered the home sees the documents. there's no compelling policy. there is no compelling legal rationale. in 2010, the circuit of kind in the united states and violates

the fourth amendment to the extent it doesn't require the law enforcement to obtain a warrant and in doing so the circuit effectively struck down espa's 180 day rule and the distinction between open and on open e-mail has aired reconcilable protection supported by the fourth amendment. google believes that the amendment in the interpretation is correct and we required a search warrant when law enforcement seeks to compel us to disclose the content of the accounts and other services. as the importance of updating the water and uniformly required with governmental entities to compel third party service providers to produce the content of electronic communications. it's effectively the law of the land is observed by the governmental entities and companies alike. in many ways, it is a modest codification of the status quo

and implementation of the conclusion. in march of 2013 and now the supreme court issued a landmark decision in riot leaders is california where it unanimously held that general officers must obtain a warrant before searching the content of a cell phone incident for a rest. it contravenes the preference for clear guidance for law enforcement to the categorical rule. to reinforce the constitutional imperative for the rules in this area chief justice concluded his opinion with unambiguous direction to law-enforcement. he wrote the fact that technology allows an individual to carry such information in his hand doesn't make the information less worthy of the protection which the founders thought. our answer to whether police

must do before searching a cell phone seized into arrest is accordingly simple. get a warrant. in the categorical rules in and the supreme court held were inherited in brightly and doing so would undermine the expectation of privacy in the corporate is a protections afforded by the fourth amendment. we urge the committee to reject such and codify the warrant for the content standards reflected in the bill. they no longer reflect the expectation of privacy and no longer comport with the fourth amendment. 356 represents an overdue update that would ensure the communications content is treated in a manner commence a bit with other papers and effects that are protected by the fourth amendment is long past time to pass a version of

356. i would be happy to answer any questions that you have. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify on the center for democracy and technology. the nonpartisan nonprofit policy advocacy organization are dedicated to protecting civil liberties and human rights including privacy, free speech and access to information. they approved 356 senator lee and leahy. everyday whistleblowers reach out to journalists and members of this committee. advocates plan protests against injustice and ordinary citizens complain about their government. all of these activities are crucial to the democracy.

they also rely on the long-held constitutional guarantee of private communications secure from arbitrary access by the government. this is true whether the communication happens in the form of a letter, a phone call or increasingly in an e-mail, text message or over a social network but as the technology has changed the legal underpinnings that protect the privacy haven't kept up. when espa was released it had three policy colors. individual privacy, jeannette needs of law enforcement and support for innovation. changes in technology have the road this balance. the reliance on trusted third parties for long-term storage of the communications have left those communications with limited statutory protections. this has created legal uncertainty for executing. one of the major business innovations in the 21st century

and one which u.s. companies xo. at the same time information is accessible to the government has increased dramatically. e-mails and text messages provide a valuable lead into the criminal activities and plans and demonstrate the motive and intent. most if not all of this information wouldn't have been available in 1986. in combination. it's clear for law enforcement this is the golden age of surveillance. in the face of an outdated statute courts have acted recognizing the cases people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their e-mail and at the same time invalidating the key parts of espa but that isn't enough on its own. it continues to lag behind the technological change in harm smaller businesses that would lack the army of leaders.

reform efforts also face a concerted assaults from several agencies that seek to gain new powers and blow a huge privacy hole in the bill. agencies of the blocked reform in spite of the fact that the sec confirmed to never using the power. no less than the other rector told the house judiciary committee that in regards to espa a change wouldn't have any effect on our practice. come on investigators also suggested that changes be enacted so the company's turnover the entire contents of a user's inbox whenever an emergency is asserted however it's not clear that this is a problem. major companies report only a few hundred of these requests every year. more troubling approximately 20% of them was to be rejected because they failed to meet the

emergency standard. support for privacy reform is deep enterprise and more than 100 technology companies that trade associations and public-interest groups have signed on to the reform principles. signatories include nearly the entire tech industry and span the political spectrum and represent privacy rights and consumer interests and free-market values. the companion bill in the house has more than 290 cosponsors including the majority of republicans and democrats. the committee has consistently sought to solve these problems were strong reform measures passing nearly identical legislation to 356 in both 2012 and 2013. the bar and boring for content has become the status quo. it's critical for the committee to approve 356 in order to cure the constitutional defect to protect individual privacy and

assure that new technology continues to enjoy robust constitutional protections. thank you. >> good morning members of the committee i want to thank the chair man and the ranking member for having the hearing on this important issue. my name is victoria espinel and i appreciate the opportunity to testify on behalf of the software alliance of leading advocate for the software industry in the united states and around the world. the members have a keen interest in today's data privacy. we support efforts to update and commend the senators for their leadership. we urge this committee to advance legislation that would better protect privacy in the 21st century. we've long worked with goodwill and the many other members of the process coalition in support of the reform. the board of directors sent a letter to congressional leadership this week

highlighting the series of legislative efforts needed to address the data policy issues and at the top of the list is the reform. when espa was enacted in 1986 most people had no conception of the internet or e-mail. congress though had the foresight to create a framework for giving law enforcement access to data while protecting privacy for the reasons that made sense in 1986 but do not today the law makes it easy to obtain access to your own e-mails to obtain a letter in the desk. the reform would include reform that was important to us because the customer trust is important to us. injuring the customers have faith in security of the e-mail and other their e-mail and other online data it is vital to ensure the trust and digital services. since this cometh consumers do not trust technology committee will not use it. they support the bipartisan amendment act because it would aid in restoring the balance in the trust equation.

and to close the ranking member from earlier this morning we leave that this is a no-brainer. today in addition to the inconsistent requirements of the law is unclear on how to govern the data requests that cross international borders. the lack of the rules create unhelpful confusion and is opened the door to u.s. law enforcement demands that could undermine the user trust around the world. the case argued last week in the second court of appeals could set the significant damaging precedent. in that case the department is seeking to compel microsoft to turn over the content of one customer's inbox. the problem in the case is this cometh customers e-mails are stored in ireland and the same way that the u.s. police cannot simply fly to ireland law-enforcement jurisdiction must be respectable if the borders as well. the center however it is done would be an obvious invasion of the sovereignty and imagine the uproar if the police try to such a move in the united states.

law enforcement agencies from different countries must and can work together to do work together to provide mutual assistance. the bipartisan act led by senators with 12 bipartisan cosponsors provides a way of addressing this issue and we commend them for their attention to these important questions. in some they support the amendment act because we believe it is critical to modernize the privacy protections to address three important goals. first protecting the privacy by sending strong consistent standards we should require the war and for all digital content and we needed to create a framework for international cross-border requests. we will be in a better position to protect the privacy of american citizens if we are not setting an example for the foreign governments to reach back into the united states.

we should help bolster the trust by enabling some that need to communicate the rules around the security of the data in the third enhancing the ability of law enforcement to work together across the international borders we need a new forward-looking framework to address the request and we need to improve the system. there is a misperception that the law enforcement has unfettered access to data it is only a misperception but that misperception is doing harm to the user trust. the effort should begin here with the legislation pending before the committee. and if i may either like to close by saying in early happy birthday to the chairman of salt. thank you and i look forward to your questions. >> i'm going to ask my questions last because i want to accommodate the senator.

>> i think i will put mine on the record mr. chairman. thank you. >> thank you very much. i have a commitment after lunch. when you introduce federal law-enforcement officers association letter which notes that. they rely on the information to generate leads and identify suspects and exonerate the king justice for the victims of crime for the violation of the civil rights and privacy by individuals and terrorists so i would often add a note that many others are sharing the same comments including the agents association order of police and national sheriffs association and major chief associations to name a few. i do believe that if you obtain

a subpoena to an individual filed in the bank and is a letter in a file then you can obtain a on the current law based on the subpoena and that's been part of the history of the country. i will acknowledge that the ability to obtain all the e-mail traffic as it goes to another so i think it's right for us to consider how to restrict that to be consistent with the supreme court and the reality that people are entitled to a degree of privacy and the expectation of privacy in the contents of those e-mails from from as wide as that is required by the constitution. maybe the supreme court says it is because a practical matter i

can understand that and i think that we can work with that. on this panel you are the only law-enforcement strong advocate. but let me ask you is there a realistic problem with delay in answers to legitimate requests from law enforcement does that place people at risk? >> the answer was the riley decision requiring the search warrant for a cell phone but if i get a search warrant i will determine how quickly i execute it. i can execute the search right away and in the instance of the search warrant for the service provider we are dependent on the service provider to process the warrant as it is fit and we suggested that should change. >> and as a practical experience, you have had what you consider law enforcement and

what they consider an ordinance delays and responses on occasion? the >> we do this every day for a living, senator, yes. they are often times the most swift response. are you concerned that we may be moving into a world where everything is erased very quickly from the time it's happening and what impact would that have? >> the concern that when we get the process to require there is the technology and the absence of requirements that govern how they are on the server and there's also in some instances now the commercial incentive for the providers of service to remove those records in a timely fashion to ensure that they are

private. >> the legislation as it is written hasn't been on either one of those two issues. >> that's correct, senator. >> and briefly, are you concerned about the ramifications of the customer notification and the danger that could pose for the law enforcement. >> because of the dangers are posed to the investigation into the administrative burden where the scheme was 180 or 190 days and obtained the delay in notification order in the world where a unit like mine has tens or hundreds of legal demand outstanding at any given time. >> thank you. and finally, to what extent does this preempt the state law and

are we dealing with federal or impacting every police officer, sheriff and prosecutor in america? >> you are indeed. they will set the bar certainly they are free from the protection that we must conform with federal law. >> we need to wrestle through it and try not to do any damage because people shouldn't treat likely the difficulties of investigating criminal like that he and how you improve the case. some of the information could be critical. >> senator white house. >> you've done a terrific job

for the administration. you've always been a great witness before the committee. why a warrant requirement and not a court order requiring that when the warrant is a court order of a particularly pro-government kind because it has quite a low standard. just to be clear it's not about 180 days -- >> it's about getting access. the companies that you represent. if they are able to comply with a warrant why would they not be willing to comply with a court order? >> i wouldn't want to imply that the companies are not able to comply with any type of inappropriate legal -- >> from the legislative point of view air asked to complain the court order. >> but in this case we believe

that the civil agencies have other tools at their disposal and we do not believe that it's appropriate to extend either substance issues as you know or this type of court order to do. >> you realize that puts you in the position of saying that if department of justice goes before the judge and in a very pro-government proceeding gets a warrant you are okay with that and if the same goes before the same judge in the contested proceeding where the subscriber actually has the right to be present and litigate the matter and then they obtained a quarter you are opposed to that is that the position that you are left with? >> our position as the civil agencies have any branch appreciate the justices every day. >> in the racketeering and things like that potentially if

the target has done a good enough job of these other traces we could communicate and take the position that we have our belief is the facility to see if they can investigate and it's our belief to see the types. >> in order for that to be the case there is no case in which access to information by the direct request to the service provider contributed in a material way to an investigation. >> it's difficult to make categorical in a difficult situation. i wouldn't want to say that but i would say that on balance it's beneath the law enforcement with privacy here and we believe that the best outcome for this is that the agency worked the tools they have rather than extending this new power to them. >> but you do agree and accept the contested court proceeding in open court and the target of

the investigation is a more rigorous safeguard than a warrant application. >> i wouldn't say that it is a more rigorous standard. >> that would be a novelty. >> i would agree with you there are different implications for privacy involved in a different kind of court order. >> mr. salgado who has a reasonable expectation of privacy against the court order for the disclosure of information? >> we think that the users certainly when issued a court order is going to have the obligation to enter the account, pull the data out and produce it and the expectation of privacy van has been satisfied to

control. >> you don't think anybody has a reasonable expectation of privacy in this country against a court order divulging information? nobody thinks that they have the rates to ignore court order do they? >> to make sure we are talking about the right it's issued to the user compelling the user to take action and the user has an opportunity that's classic rule of law. >> so the reasonable expectation is on the part of a person with respect to their own information depends on where the request for the information is made? >> in the the the the expectation deep of the expectation of privacy -- >> i'm not sure it is. you can think about the proposal here in a slightly different way and see how it works out. if you have a situation had a situation where the user had records in their home refusing to comply in the court order but

it's clear they had the documents or there was some reasonable suspicion for whatever the standard would be what they would okay but have us to this issue in order to allow them to enter the home to go get the record and in fact slightly different and that the order would be issued to go to a landlord were someone else that could go to this protected area and get the records and produce it. i don't think we would stand for this in the physical world we would say you have the obligation to comply with this order and it will meet all sorts of enforcement sanctions. at no point will you have -- >> so you would be comfortable with a court order in which the owner of the information was present in the courtroom and the

court directed the owner of the information to require you to provide it to law enforcement in order to solve the problem that you just described. >> we are talking about a protected area either the home or the account should be entered only in the civil context for the civil infractions by the user. but not to order the provider to do it on behalf of the agent. >> so you would be comfortable with a court order as long as it directed the user to release the information maintained by your company. that's what it's done now.

>> you asked good questions. thank you. >> thank you mr. chairman. currently the u.s. government takes the position that it can compel the technology company to turn over the data located anywhere in the world belonging to a citizen of any country so long as the data can be accessed in the united states. how does the government position affect -- how has the government position affected the global competitiveness of the companies that represent are the listing business and if so, how? >> thank you. first i would start by saying that i promised that has been the case and it will continue to be the case and that is the case in part because of the policies and the walls that the congress has put in place. but we do have concern that the

situation that exists right now is undermining the customer trust account of the world. of the world. and our ability to compete is undermined if customers around the world do not trust u.s. technology providers. so we do have concerns that the case is going on and the outcome of the case low risk customer trust and that will have a negative impact on the customers to compete overseas. i will say i think that the worst-case scenario is we end up in a position for the companies either the government agency or their companies to use the u.s. technology because of the concern. >> do you agree the government's position on the extraterritorial reach puts our privacy at a greater risk of interest and by the foreign government? >> yes we believe there is a serious risk and this will create an example other governments will use to reach

back into the united states and in my testimony i referred to a case that was argued in the second circuit. this issue came out and played out of the argument in the case the department of justice took the position that the disclosure that doesn't regulate the disclosure of e-mail as long as the disclosure takes place overseas. if you take that argument to its logical conclusion and the department of justice acknowledges that this is the case, that means the u.s. law wouldn't be able to stop any foreign government from reaching back into the united states and accessing or demanding the e-mail's of anyone sitting in this room. we have real concerns about that. we think that is an issue that should be addressed. we need to have some sort of a framework to address that and there needs to be a framework that is easy for companies, customers and law-enforcement could understand it needs to be clear and transparent. congress has a role to play and this is an issue that can be addressed and we support the act as a way to try to address that

concern. >> some question whether the act would promote the data. do you agree? >> so, i should say that we are categorically opposed to the localization and we've been opposing the government discouraging the government from putting the policies in place around the world. so we wouldn't support the legislation if we believed that it would lead to the data utilization. >> it happens for lots of reasons. many of which are straight up protectionist trying to keep the technology companies out of the market. we do not believe that the outcome would lead to the greater. what we do believe is a greater risk is failing to address this issue and failing to set up a clear framework for how to deal with these international cross-border requests would lead to a situation where the u.s. companies are being locked out of markets with the allegiant situations where other

governments are seeing what is happening in the u.s. and using that as a roadmap to reach back into the united states to get the data of the citizens. that is a greater risk. >> mr. salgado and calabrese do you believe that there is a legislation for how and when law enforcement connects the data stored a broad? >> i can speak for google there is a need for legislation that addresses the access by the u.s. law enforcement of the users who are not in the united states or who were not are not u.s. citizens. the focus on where the data stored doesn't make sense to us and what and would lead to some bad results. but putting aside the one future of the act, we think that there are ways to structure this that don't take into a count data you need to localization would

satisfy the spirit into the name spirit and the name of the proposal. >> first, i appreciate your support for the bill as it is undermined and being added to by the act. certainly this is a complicated area. cdt believes that he started an incredibly important conversation. you have created some tools in terms of what would be invaluable speeding up law-enforcement investigations and we give me that we can find an answer that gives everyone appropriate access to information overseas and we worry about allowing china and russia of the world to have access to information held by u.s. companies and we appreciate your efforts to avoid that. >> for both of you again from the mutual legal assistance

facilities facilitates agreement for sharing evidence between the united states and foreign countries and unfortunately the process is driven slow and cumbersome to use. how important is it that the congressman has the process to make it more transparent and streamlined if you will? >> thank you senator for that. yes, i think that they've proven to be a valuable mechanism and it's critical for keeping the rule of law and sanity on the international cooperation around the data collection. it's also proven to be very slow and it's hindering the legitimate investigations overseas for the need of the u.s. companies and the data that

is stored at the united states were held by the u.s. people in an effective way. it will be for the rule of law and the actual steps that we need to take i think that there are some things we can do around the legal a legal assistance treaty process itself to streamline it. some of them are rather obvious things to do more training on how to use the treaty process outside of the united states. certainly the funding being provided to the office of international affairs in the department of justice is going to go a long way. the bureau is setting up a unit so there are very many practical steps that can be taken to help improve the treaty process. we also think it might be time to take a look at alternatives to the treaty process situations where it may not be necessary for the u.s. to exert quite so much control over the data disclosure in situations where

it may not actually have equities in the behavior of u.s. company around the disclosure. lots of discussions to be had there area but we appreciate the leadership of your parts trying to make this quicker. >> thank you senator grassley. thank you for this hearing. and senator hatch for your questions as well and to the first panel. mr. salgado, we heard some discussions about the case in 2010 essentially vindicated that your position that the digital due process coalition and also shares the words required whenever law enforcement seeks a subscriber content. and while the decision is binding law technically only in the sixth circuit, doj and federal agencies testified that they are following its nationwide. so could you just provide benefits to speak to why is the statutory reform still necessary? >> it's true that the law right now the constitutional law and the way we are behaving does reflect a a warrant is required

by the agencies the be basically agencies or criminal agencies in order to get the content of communications we think that's right that we have an unconstitutional provision and we can fix that. we have a very elegant way in the current bill that takes care of those quickly, easily. doesn't actually change the way that agencies are going to be responding and the way that they they have been for the last five years. we certainly appreciate the concerns that have been raised in a rather long debate over this provision. that, i'm afraid that these may be distractions around with the committee can do and can do the right thing to pass this bill without further delay to deal with other issues worthy of discussion that need not hold a change that already agrees is needed. >> thank you for the answer.

mr. calabrese should congress be aware of when it considers the international application of the war and in terms of privacy, human rights, reciprocity or any other relevant concerns that he would have right in front of us when we move forward? ..

not just the subjects of investigation, but ordinary folks who may be witnesses. those people would have everything in their inbox that was relevant to an investigation. so a dramatic amount of information as opposed to topple will cause of evidence of a crime. that's a really troubling privacy invasion. and it's one that has nothing to do with the underlying bill. i apologize or hijacking your question. i thought it was important for this committee to understand we would be taught but it huge power grab. it's incredibly important that we update the mlat the process and update ecpa. because we have the strongest public until the paternalistic,

we have the strongest privacy protections in the world with a warrant based on probable cause, by neutral magistrate. right now we are seeing companies -- excuse me, other countries come to us and essentially meet that standard. it's important we keep that attitude continued to meet that standard. were the best ways we can do that is by having a quick streamlined frontal process so they can give us the information we need and we can have everybody around the world perhaps bring their standard up to that important probable cause standard. >> transit, terrific to see again. i greatly enjoyed working with you when you're leading ipad and now in your quibble at esa. i'm grateful for long and effective leadership on international property issues and now are the difficult issues in front of us. i've worked with senator hatch and 11 other bipartisan calls bonser's -- cosponsors.

i think is commonsense rule would enhance trust and compared to end our competitiveness. some in law enforcement have argued that an extraterritorial ecpa is a because other investigative processes like the mlat are too slow. can you speak to that concern and how your members strive to be good partners to law enforcement often without the need to obtain a warrant or to go to the mlat process? >> thank you for your leadership on the leads act. so first i want to be clear that we do know what to make the job of law enforcement in order. we very much support while law enforcement does and the critical mission they have and are companies work everyday both what they do themselves and with law enforcement to help support that mission. we've talked a lot about mlat today. we support mlat reform and i'm happy to elaborate on the reasons why we do and the things we think we tend to improve the mlat system but you raise an

important point that mlat is not the way u.s. law enforcement can work with for law enforcement. so to give a practical example of that, on january 7 of this year, terrific attacks on the child had to office to place in pairs. u.s. law enforcement worked with french law enforcement went to microsoft had asked for e-mails commission relevant commitment that was taking place in paris at that time. it was the middle of the night on the west coast and notwithstanding that within 45 minutes, the e-mails relevant to the investigation were enhance the french law enforcement. i raise this as an example that mlat are important tool, a tool that should be improved not only to law enforcement has to work with foreign law enforcement. we believe that it is important both for us to improve the mlat system but for us to be looking for as many ways as possible to try -- >> we are going to be the last few minutes of this hearing on electronic privacy, and take you

live now to a forum on criminal justice reform. to the remarks and several panelists including attorney general loretta lynch. it's the 45th annual legislative conference of the congressional black caucus foundation. this is live coverage on c-spa c-span2. >> i went straight to bible study, and thought, well, what wisdom can be offered on the issue of race in the policing in contemporary america? as is quickly the case with my bible which is wiser tha than ii opened it and went straight to problems four, seven. it says wisdom is the principal thing. -- proverbs. therefore, get wisdom. and in all thy getting, understand. somebody say wisdom. >> wisdom. >> in a moment when black lives

matter is not just the call but the response to it is not just the art but the science, i tend to meditate on the wisdom of what does it mean, what do we call to do. what is required of us would a person or group of people matters to us. what is required of me is i love you if you matter to me is not just that i get to know you, that i understand you, but that i get to know and understand the things that influence you. if i have a child, i'm not a responsible parent if i love child and ignore the friends that the child is hanging out with. if i have a partner that i'm thinking of marrying, it's not responsible for me to love him or her and have no idea what their friends are saying about me. and if black lives matter it is not responsible of us as a people, as a nation, to be loving black folks while

ignoring the law enforcement that is affecting their lives everyday. if i want to get wisdom on how to make black lives matter, i need to take seriously the idea that we need to increase our literacy on police issues. we need to understand policing, okay? and i don't just mean that we need to read about it in the paper. we need to be able to enter some fund of the questions about the character and the content of policing. so hav i have some fundamental questions to you. how many people were pulled over in their vehicle by police last year? raise your hand if you know the answer. raised it high because we all want to know. we will skip that one. how many times was force used by a police officer against a citizen of the united states last year? go ahead, raise your hands up high. we need to know.

maybe we will skip that one as well. how about this, our residential segregated communities more likely to increase police presence and racially integrated communities? all right. raise your hand if you got that data to prove that point. raise it by because i need to know. -- high. our lack of litter see on police issues on the state as a national embarrassment. we ought to be ashamed of ourselves, and all of us want to proclaim that we need to do better, myself included. i've gone from the bible, i've got to go to my mama. he can't be allowed -- you can't be loud and wrong. you can't be loud and bigger. so we need to know if black lives matter the we need to take seriously the project of coming to understand policing, not just literate but fluid in the culture of policing on its own

terms in its own sake. the way we need to understand the french for children, the parents of our partners and the character of this country. if black lives matter we need to take policing seriously. somebody say wisdom. so that is the goal of today. up here we have some of the nations best at fixing our national embarrassment of a lack of data and a lack of understanding. i'm proud of partners appear in the center for policing equities national justice database from the first and largest collection of data on police behavior. ever going to be hearing from people that from their tireless efforts come from their lifelong commitment and from the jobs they're doing right now today right before they showed up in n right after they leave this meeting are helping to correct the embarrassment, the lack of wisdom that we have on how we can make good on our requirements of making black lives matter.

so everyone up here and those who will come in at a later point will get about seven minutes to speak. will edges and push it amongst ourselves but we want to make sure there are questions we get from the also please stay with us, state engaged. i'll be keeping very, very, very brief introduction for everyone. and then they will expand other particular topic. is that good with everybody? okay. i want you to understand we may not be a black church but many of us are black church so it's okay to calm response to the. you may not be moved to say amen but some of you may be. so coming from the middle of the panel i'm going to pick on one of my very good friends, the drug of the office ron davis if that is going to be safe by sitting in the middle and wasn't going to have to go first but i think it's important we hear from federal voices in terms of what is moving on this. ron davis having spent a

lifetime and law enforcement in oakland and then is one of the most distinguished chiefs of police in the nation in east palo alto, revolutionary, transit and innovate in community policing is not the first african-american director of the council office and has been doing tremendous work, a collaborative reform and working with consent decrees and giving some carrots to police department and not just sticks. >> you want me to sit here or -- >> however you want to see but i would prefer to see you stand. please join me in welcoming director davis. [applause] >> good morning. i would say thank you, but i'm not -- i'll do that later. is real quick, it's good to be. i think this is great timing, great topic. i spent 30 years in law enforcement before we coming to the office. 20th in the great city of oakland, the very the first and house-senate committee. when it faces challenges and anf

years plus at least how aldous chief, another great diversity of faces is challenges. when it came to office i think what a brought with me was a misunderstanding watching the evolution of policing of the last 30 years that i think back when as hard as a rookie cop in 1985. a special program for 12 year olds and -- see if you catch it. [laughter] when i ge got hired in 1985 as a rookie cop where we were at as a profession and those have been around that was right the beginning of the crack epidemic. i think about what brought me value the street officer, how i was evaluated, what was policing about. it was healthy about enforcement. the way you excelled in the on position which we make this -- does it. it indicates 1985 thing you believe in reentry, i would've told you my job is to reenter every parolee back to prison. no one changes. that's the way it is. we are the fault of just not the case. we also know despite our best

efforts we've made a lot of progress since the 1980s, more diverse, evidence-based come engaging more community policing but things haven't done it left a lot of the communities behind the first appointed you in friend the first but with the stock is, start with acknowledgment of the role that law enforcement has played throughout history. went to acknowledge that because that creates the generation is trust that exists today. and you see people that are demonstrating, people that are forced to come is because there disconnected, disenfranchised and the system doesn't seem this room and was designed to use those with an obligation to address it. what i would tell you i've never seen such an opportunity. i was in a police department when rodney king incident occurred. i have seen crises come and go. it seems to come and then go. ithis i think is fair to say i blame we are in a new civil rights movement. a question for my colleagues in

lieu and in uniform are what will other place going to play in the civil rights movement? in the 60s with applicable of oppressing it, disrupting it, trying to prevent it. i think in 20% would play a role of facilitating it, supporting it, being a part of because we need to make changes. if you recall they saw things going on in the country in december of last year, present obama and there's decoration of the present task force of the 21st century policing the a return to because that provides a roadmap for state identified 11 outstanding members to lead this. i was honored to serve as the executive director with the cops office in these 11 people were diverse, please choose, academics, young people can write off the lines in ferguson and demonstration lines, off the lines in new york. their academics and civil rights attorneys who were admitted to holder was pursuing -- suing police department. such diverse views, people

wanted to become together to build anything? i think we learned diverse views are not divisive views. there's a difference. within its diversity they're able to come together and build consensus. i think so the first lesson is you can bring people with diverse views to the table and still build consensus. at the challenge is yet to bring people that will stretch you out if you limit. decanted by the people you're comfortable with. invite the people you're not. they came up with a series of recommendations that hope you had a chance to look for. on how to build trust that make our nation safer. when the president charges the staff them were very clear. he also went to make sure we would continue enhancing public safety. so i think that's what the task force is able to do. this is the report that is out there. now the charges going to make sure this report does not sit on the shelf, and becomes alive,

the people embracing around the country, the department is using it as a roadmap and we're starting to see that. i'm traveling all over and speaking -- suing police chief reporting to the committee, those things they've already implemented. this has to be driven by everyone, not just the police. we are coproducers, community and the police together. i want to end with this if i can. i want to think about a couple concepts that drive me, nice to be a police chief. that is as we start talking of fighting crime and violence is something in a fight where it is our way. it's as we start struggling with crime rates in homicides and violence we can lose our way because we want to thank the other thing with posters reduce crime and wha was the fact publc safety is not just the absence of crime and also is the presence of justice. [applause] of what you think about this. if you think about a neighborhood, whoever controls

the open public space abatement controls the quality of life for people that live there. think about your neighbor, think of where you grope especially in urban centers. whoever controls the open space controls the quality of life. it again members and -- if gang members and drug dealers owner, they on the. so the on the. several of the on the. several of the police as not to take over that public space, not too saturated with stop and frisk, not to take thousands of people to jail, it is to empower and work with the committee to take control of the own public space so that they can be alive, well and reduce crime. it's all about retaining control of these neighborhoods by the community with the community and not against it and not fighting it. in 30 years i would take we are at a defining moment in american policing history. with a small window of opportunity to come with any crisis but i caution, the window

will close very quickly. is usually replaced with a door of past mistakes. let's i keep repeating the same mistakes. let's have the courage to the discussions were supposed. let's use words like race and bias, talk about excessive force, supporting officers, not every cop is bad, not every young person is dead. we need had the courage to talk about what we need to do for the future. we need to come together. this is one of those times and when it's time for me to leave this office i want to say we came together, and we worked together and that the country is better for it. i'll tell you something. when a look at the offices right now, i look at the leadership as i traveled this country to those who may be apprehensive, take some solace, i've seen a new generation of officers that are smarter kashmir people get mad at me but i'll say it anyway, come from a lot more diverse environments. they want to do the right thing. went to help them. let's not make this a fight.

let's not make this a debate. let's make it a dialogue on work together and am looking for two questions you guys may have and don't get you later, phil, so thank you. [applause] >> it is now my absolute pleasure, it's an honor to introduce the represented at michigan's 13th district and the man who was introduced more civil rights legislation than any other individual in history of this country, representative john conyers. [applause] [cheers and applause] >> [inaudible conversations] >> top of the morning, everybody. >> good morning. >> great to be here. pleased to be a to help convene the annual forum on criminal

justice reform. this year, we are joined by policing practices experts to help us gain a better understanding of the challenges to resolving the growing divide between the police and minority communities which they serve. i say that carefully. we want to understand the challenges to resolve the growing divide between the police and minority communities which they serve. the tragic deaths of michael brown, eric garner, walter scott, freddie gray have sparked pain and outrage in communities across the nation calling for congressional action.

now, for many in our communiti communities, the death of these men, along with many others, represents a continuing and dangerous cycle of disproportionate use of force against men of color. we must find fear -- we must find here today, this weekend, concrete solutions to stop this pattern. we need to ease racial tension in america i rebuilding our communities in a balanced way. for everyone receives equal education. that's where it starts. job opportunities and a fair shot at the american dream. both equal education is where it starts but the home is where it

really starts, isn't it? it's the home. the sad truth about this kind of an incident is that its root causes are tied together with societal racism, that brand of black citizens as predators come and please practice that treats them as potential perpetrators. breeding distrust between law enforcement and the community that they are bound to protect. responding to this destructive cycle requires a broad-based approach. to address police practices, i was proud to pass 42 usc 14141,

the federal statute as part of the 1994 crime bill to allow the department of justice this do or provide local police departments with resources necessary to address dangers and discriminatory practices that result in excessive force or racial profiling. this statute, this law has been used successfully across the nation to reduce the number of least involved shootings, the illustrative of the positive effect of legislative reform efforts. via facts of 42 usc 14141, along with the introduction -- vfx -- along with h.r. 1933, the end racial profiling act, play a

crucial role in breaking historically unjust practices of law enforcement. racial profiling is an issue that affects many people of color on a regular basis. let's face it, and is just one piece of the greater issue of unjust practices directed towards minorities in different communities across the nation. h.r. 1933 was introduced to directly address the issue, the illegal use of race by law enforcement agencies. it represents a comprehensive federal commitment to healing the rift caused by racial profiling, and restoring public confidence in the criminal justice system. it is designed to enforce the

constitutional right to the equal protection of law by changing the policies and procedures underlying the act of racial profiling. and further i've introduced h.r. 2875, the law enforcement trust and integrity act. this legislation provides incentives for local police organizations to voluntarily adopt performance-based standards to ensure that incidents of misconduct will be minimized through appropriate management training and oversight protocols. and that if such incidents do occur, they will be properly investigated. the bill also provides police officers, the vast majority who are pretty decent people who are concerned with their community,

with the tools necessary to work with their communities to enhance their professional growth and education. we must continue the discussion on criminal justice reform, develop legitimate plans to make local law enforcement agencies more accountable to their communities. until we develop a concrete plan, to address the root causes, we can only wait to see tragic events repeated across other communities. and so this panel will feature experts from the department of justice, law enforcement and advocacy community to provide an overview of the continuing challenges and police community

relations. law enforcement accountability and transparency, and racial profiling. and i am pleased now to turn the floor over to professor philip from the center of policing equity. thank you, and it's good to see all of you here. [applause] >> [inaudible conversations] >> so as the professor amadeus,

i felt that there are lots of different modes of learning, that we have available to us. and i'd like to now turn over to the far end of the dais to miss been a. she was the counsel for the house judiciary committee -- sorry? oh, sorry. i have the wrong -- like i said, her voice is here, present with us -- [laughter] her spirit -- [laughter] i apologize. let me have you introduced yourself so i don't get any more of the details wrong. i apologize. thank you. [applause] >> so good morning. >> good morning.

>> so i am tonya clay house and i am the policy director with the lawyers' committee for civil rights under law. and i am going to be speaking to you today on behalf of the lawyers committee but i will say that as some have ordered i will be leaving the lawyers committee -- my last day was tuesday podesta on behalf of the lawyers committee. and i will be heading into the department of education as the deputy assistant secretary. [applause] >> so of course some of the issues that want to talk about today are dealing with school discipline. so we will get to that as well. i do appreciate, thank you, philip, for the introduction. and thank you to mr. congress can i don't know if he's still here, for allowing me to be on this panel today. i've been unable to participate on these different while and

it's a great opportunity to have all of you all come here today and he was so many things are going on because we don't often get that chance being we are here inside the beltway but you need to understand exactly how things are really working. and so as the lone woman up here today i also want to talk about a couple issues with regard to black women and policing. some of the distinctions and unique factors that are faced. so let me, without further ado, kind of go into a few things. ..

the civil rights coalition was reform the low over a year ago and one of the things we do is we put together a national organization and we bring together state organizations are grassroots activists and create a strategy which people can figure out what are the things we need to be doing both for the top to bottom.

i appreciate the conversations that we've had her outfits with ron davis. and let me inform you of a couple things i want to talk about. where are we on a lot of these investigations that are occurring. what are the updates and how do we get this information out to people to know how are things being pursued him and i think that it's always been for us to get this information because we also know that those are beyond a lot a lot of us in organizations a lot of us don't know how that process is working so it was good for us to have that conversation because right now what we are going to do is be putting together a webinar to bring together everybody to say you know what this is how to process what is working at the doj and this is all of the investigations and how long it

actually takes you need to understand things are going on. things are happening in baltimore. there is no consent decree despite what people think and there are strategies going on in louisiana so this is good work and part of that needs to be about policy reform so while we appreciate the creation of a task force we also know there are some things that we need to continue to work on for example the broken windows policy which is kind of the policy that is engaged across the country by many law enforcement agencies that utilize more aggressive practices on lesser crimes with the idea that somehow that is going to stymie any further

criminal activity. what we unfortunately know is that this actually simply leads to racial profiling and this harassment that we are aware of the new york this is the result of these broken window policies so that has to be done on a policy level with fundamental changes. for the issues of women because we often hear about the impact about the profiling we will hear more about this happening but they have a unique perspective on this as well because it's much different when it comes to the policing of women in general but particularly because first of all we are over sexualized to get at yet at the same time we are made to feel that we are overly aggressive and so then we combine all of that and there is

a lack of respect and appreciation and then there is an there's an overaggressive path that is engaged upon black women because of the different power structures that are engaged. we've heard about sandra pulled over for changing claims and then dying in police custody and there is a concern about what's going on and is there an investigation happening. so we know what we don't because right now there is so much happening but lastly we just

wanted to focus on where a lot of this is beginning which is the policing. right now there is a over criminalization that's happening within our school. we have what are called school resource officers. so what happens is we have the kids being arrested. they are being shackled and cuffed because they had an outburst. screaming for 15 minutes because nobody understood that there were other techniques.

we have a volcano that exploded in the classroom and all of a sudden they are arrested and sent to alternative schools. we have situations where preschoolers are being thrown out and suspended for preschool. what did you do in preschool classics i'm serious i have a 2-year-old and a 6-year-old in heaven forbid they are to boys. my goodness when we were growing up, this wasn't the case. so we have to deal with what is happening in the schools and how it's beginning between the children and between police. they are getting that early on and our kids are being taught not only early on to fear police but then they are being taught that our children are not worth the respect and they are not worth human beings. they are only looked at as potential criminals.

it is leading to the schools pipeline and i appreciate the opportunity for continued engagement. so i have to leave a little bit early but i want to stay as long as i can so i want to have an opportunity to discuss. [applause] when we are looking at the ways that the law enforcement are engaging in the communities we are seeing the images of the ways in which the black masculinity are being violated

because that is what happens on the streets. the cameras will catch that. they will not catch responses to domestic violence were things that are happening many times in custody and will not capture things undercover we are talking about human trafficking or sex work that is where women are vulnerable in the system so as we move to reform let's make sure that we keep in mind we don't read stand g8 sexism in the world and the way that we reform law enforcement. the perfect note to bring gregory thomas to the front who is the president of the national organization in law enforcement, executives gregory has been a thinker on all of these issues for quite some time. it is an essential voice making sure that we are able to see the

humanity of the communities and of the officers who must be sworn to protect them. [applause] so the policies of the police for the record mandate the development of the police shootings to teach students to pass the police exams. finally they proposed the establishment of the departmental guidelines for the field investigations and procedures in the effort to reduce harassment to better define the executive the officials recommend. it was also a commanded that the

executive advocate and the examination of the assignment practices and promotion procedures to ensure equal opportunity for the advancement. the officials also recommended to establish executive career programs. by initiating the study classes lastly it recommended the black police executives be accountable to the black community and that they be urged to speak for the community within the department of the community at large. good afternoon. the recommendations i just read to you within a very small bit of paraphrasing the recommendations that were made during the course of the law enforcement symposium held here in washington, d.c. the

symposium. it's about the high rate of crime. it was held in washington, d.c. on september 7 and 9th 1976. it was during the symposium that the national executives were founded. the nationalization is also known as noble. it looks like the 19th century critic he seems to have gotten a ride when they made this famous quote of the more things change the more they stay the same.

it was in the american conscience as they were policing and has caused a tide and some may argue a suit on the recommendations from the policy interest groups, public policy experts and those in the public that think they are experts on how to fix a broken law-enforcement and criminal justice system so here we are again close to 40 years after the founding, 40 years after the founders met to discuss some of these signatures of policing that we are discussing today. here we are again putting on the collective thinking caps to resolve the problem or problems the members already knew how to solve so i'm proud to say that noble is involved in the conversation. we have been as mentioned earlier the task force that president obama put together to look at policing and we been under the task force and did a lot of work to ensure that we heard the voices of the members of the community regarding the

need to look at policing and a different different light and we've also been involved in other work done by the cops office had also supported the congressman's work that he's doing now to look at police reform. we are involved in the desire to make sure of the police accountability and also at the same time make sure that it's reasonable accountability that we can reach those that you read for two in assessing the police departments better across the board. i also take pride in that as others here tuesday evening i got a phone call made a wednesday from the white house where the senior adviser called me and my colleagues to talk more about what we can do to advance this conversation and police reforms that you can know that they've been involved to ensure that we get this right and also to ensure that we have a balanced conversation about the fact there is no doubt there are similar acts being conducted around the country. we get that and we know that.

but we recognize that are doing the work well and keep them on the forefront because i don't anybody in this room that expects to call the matter where you are in the country and no matter who answers. they want to be there in the right context and the right respect for your community and who you are in that community. as we continue to discuss the need for police accountability and reform i would ask that we not discount and forget the lessons and challenges of the past because if we do, if we do we are surely doomed to repeat them. thank you. [applause] it is now my pleasure to introduce. those of you that are on twitter are aware that he loves his blackness and yours and if you are ever in need of love i encourage you to follow him.

do not speak for the movement, he speaks for himself but when he does, many in the movement here their voices echo. he's been an invaluable ways at making sure that those that are in institutions of power that have positions of authority and have the capacity to change institutions and to use it for the good are held accountable and are kept accountable to the voices of those that are not used to participate in this great democracy. it is my honor. please help me welcome him. [applause] >> i apologize for being late. i am a protester in many cities across the country i do have a social media platform in august of last year about 800 followers on twitter out of about 200,000 now to work on the messaging in the movement in the capacity.

i discovered a couple of points to come up often when is the one is the notion on community policing and one of the pushes is that it's coded. it coded. the policing often means let's put the police, let's have them sit all over the communities and for so many people that means another form of surveillance. it's not what we think about georgetown. those communities are safe because they are flooded with police because they are resource different ways we want to complicate effort he pulls the fatigue was when people talk about community often means something that is racially coded and there is a thing about what the police are in the community and if they play basketball with people if they knew it in the neighborhoods would be safer because the relationship and do you think about the upper west side it's those kids walking to school, the police are not escorting them saying what are

you doing today after school lets play basketball. it's the notion that we think about policing race is always at play. i was at another panel where somebody said you know, join the police and be a part of the change. you should think about joining the police department if you want to be part of the change. what we seek to people is i don't think to be a police officer for people to do their jobs. i don't need to be a teacher to expect great education or a doctor to expect good health care. we can press upon the institution and expect things because it is a public institution. [applause] i also want to complicate the way we think about crime. on another panel said panels and he said one of the police members said that is sort of her response and they are not in wall street where people are selling cocaine and heroin that is actually not true to read and

when it and when i say that the response is less complicated. and i said that is also racist. when it's black people the crime is a big crying is a big pervasive thing but when we talk about non- black people commit crime becomes a nuance. it becomes domestic violence. it becomes insider-trading. but when we talk about black people there is this notion of crying people also use the argument to talk about baltimore and where i'm from it is the issue to be unsafe. and what i would say is the response might have been unsafe but the way isn't to harm people. also there's fascinating research i would push people to look at. we talked about a lot of implicit bias is also new research the results of new research that came in i think this is your research. [laughter]

>> you should read his research everybody, it's great. but on the testing and security as potentially a better predictor of aggressive policing than racial bias might be in fascinating research we are looking at that they came out with interesting research that pushes back. we talk about the policing and we believe that is important. what he is arguing is that there is a -- he called that public disorder. he's saying that it's actually misleading to a lot of the violence and communities in this idea that it is a personal drama and it is a domestic abuse abuse is landlord-tenant disputes that actually ripple into violence that we call community violence with people hiding behind the car ready to steal your purse is actually not what is leading to the violence in the community and it's interesting and we are starting to explore. there is this question of can we work together and we need we

can. requires an acknowledgment from the police or the institution but there is stuff to be worked on. so it is always a conditional apology. we over police the protesters because they shut down the street. it's not like we shouldn't have pepper spray that man that had his hands up. but isn't this how we should have approached it and i can tell the police are going to come to the table that reflect the legend of the things they might have done and somebody that is going to we had a great meeting with valerie jarrett the other day. i will end with two things. one is the response not all police and we agree that there is something about the institution of policing that is problematic for so many people. i think the campaign that we just launched but it's a

platform policy solution around the policing because we believe that we can make at least structurally we can live in a world where the police don't kill people, they don't kill people every day in all states for three and but three and over 800 people. we have a problem. but we believe that we can and this and we also want to complicate the notion of safety. the safety of communities isn't predicated on the presence of police but it's a much more expansive notion and policing and that we need to the center of the policing in the way we think about what it means to be safe so the safety becomes like jobs and workforce development and all these other things that georgetown isn't safe because the police are there they are there for a host of reasons and i will talk about the police contract for that. this is an institution of policing and there are a lot of cities where discipline is automatically removed in one or two or three year cycles so to do something you are like that has no discipline history. it's not because they didn't do

anything. they were never disciplined. they were literally encouraged across the country. they can to give could give a statement like in maryland all these protections that essentially guarantee there won't be accountability and we just don't think that's fair. chicago for example for an officer to get a lot of tests and the person that accuses them has a lot to pass and we are like that isn't a standard that is hoping any of the people. we want to complete the situation and we struggle with things like community policing and we struggle with the way the police come to the table to talk about how to move forward. so i'm thankful. [applause] >> all kinds of people being discovered today. the next introduction that is my privilege to make is that hillary shelton. i will read the former title of

the directive. i needed the need the fans to go and just have your moment of currently serves as the director's washington bureau and a senior vice president for advocacy parties. he has been instrumental in bringing forward the civil rights act of voting rights restoration act and every action that needs to be restored in civil justice -right-brace so please join me in welcoming. [applause] spinet i'm honored to be here and i'm actually going to sprint through a marathon. it really is a company has a problem. it's a company accompanied of problem that requires a comprehensive approach and quite frankly i'm interested on this

particular panel he talks about about what we are talking about now the assistance and to research and the assessment and even the implementation was done by many of those that were here. we are sitting next to ron davis. you hear about the weekend fisherman and in the work that has been done going way back in all of the other brothers and sisters that are on the panel now and those that can come in just a little bit later and with that i would also be remixed. [applause] every piece of legislation that we worked on, john conyers led the charge. we regulated to be there with him and made sure the issues and challenges by the communities were taken care of and were able to be actively involved in addressing those concerns as well. ..

the -- with losses trust and integrity of law enforcement because we are pleased officers that involve themselves in racial profiling.

let me stop there for half a second. when is a racial profiling it is fascinating to me that the men who led the charge, help you give him another huge round of applause for mr. john conyers. [applause] thank you so much. we can address these issues from a good policing approach. there's not one professional law-enforcement person who will tell you we need to have change of policy without data. that's what they tell me all the time. good data leads to good law enforcement but for some reason some of those have actually stop us from collecting that data. i will never forget our good friends from, call names, our friends at the police union, fob, thank you so much. it was on the tip of your time. the fraternal order of police sent a letter to john conyers we

introduced a data collection abilities said we opposed your bill simply to collect data on routine traffic stops. thinking that he said the reason we don't want our police officers involved in sociological experiment. so when one hand we want david to craft a positive on the other hand, we don't want to collect the data. there's a real problem and that's why this bill is a crucial. the end racial profiling act, collects data, holding law enforcement accountable and assured they do with this post be doing and not target us. for those who drove down highway 95 and the last segment on a number years ago, 17% of the driving population was african-american. we determined between her and delaware 70% of all the routine traffic stops, african-americans. we have a real problem but only for david will tell. thank you, mr. conyers, for

making sure that happens. happens. [applause] with you change your policies about policing. talk about training. training is only as good as the policy. in essence we don't have good solid policy and what we do when we get stopped by police officers can what they can do come at what point in the lead force leading to deadly force? i think we've been amazed as to what happened to a bunch of people cling to a 12 year-old kid playing on a playground that for some reason it became accessible end of one of these cases will result was one of was the chief spokesperson for those law enforcement agencies coming to the microphone and sing they did it by the book. everything they did was right. it was consistent with the law. i thank god the john conyers recognize that as well and if you're thinking this is what the law says we've got to change the law. as we move and pass this into law will set policies for winning it is acceptable to use

certain forms of force. windjana used that taser and when should the user? when kennedy is the and how should the user? it is not acceptable for a police officer to pull up to a playground because a kid was reportedly playing with a gun on the playground and within two seconds shooting twice in the chest. there's a real problem when the police officers, leadership says this is okay, he didn't buy the book. we have a dead 12 year old who was playing with his toy gun at what point is it acceptable for a child to play with his toy if it's not on the playground, i don't know where it is. so let us pass this bill as quickly as we can thank you mr. conyers for your leadership on that as well. don't be fooled, in essence we do want body cams. we thank god for dash cams. want to make sure our policies are in place and what point they have to lay them on.