Algorithms in the Courtroom: A Philosophical Consideration of the Quantifiability of Justice Público

Abstract

Quality of society continues to diminish as inequality persists. For far too long, there has been an urgent need for a more fair and effective criminal justice system in the United States. Modern times, in response, have called upon machine learning and algorithmic softwares as a means to the solution. Through violence risk predictors and sentencing programs, jurisdictions nationwide have implemented algorithms as assistants to judges and parole officers in what proponents hope is the beginning of a data-driven sentencing structure. Named after the very moral it aims to uphold, the justice system is in dire need of mitigating the bias and discrimination it has antithetically promoted since its inception. This paper explores justice from its roots in classical and modern philosophical thought, turning to technological ethics and Constitutional rights to consider the implications of increasing courtroom automation. 

I ultimately arrive at two indispensable questions when considering the algorithmic means of quantifying justice: is it possible and is it desirable? I conclude that it is neither possible nor desirable. Additionally, I argue that the continuation of this pursuit only furthers society from attaining justice, perpetuates the prejudicial cycle it is claiming to dismantle, and severely encroaches upon fundamental guarantees in the U.S. Constitution. I propose alternative solutions including investment in the people themselves rather than in the machines predicting their crime, on community initiatives which promote individual education and support, and the integration of artificial intelligence in distinct capacities of the legal field where the stakes are not as high as they are for defendants awaiting the fates of their sentencing verdicts. 

Table of Contents

I.               Introduction..................................................................................................................................................1

II.             Justice.............................................................................................................................................................5

Ancient Thought...................................................................................................................................6

Contemporary Thought......................................................................................................................9

III.           Concepts of Criminal Law.....................................................................................................................11

Criminalization..................................................................................................................................12

Theories................................................................................................................................................13

IV.          Influx of Technology...............................................................................................................................16

Intent and Development...................................................................................................................17

Legal Integration...............................................................................................................................18

V.            Ethics of Technology...............................................................................................................................20

Value-Neutrality.................................................................................................................................20

Responsibility......................................................................................................................................22

The Case of Boeing 737 Max 8......................................................................................................23

VI.          Engineering Ethics...................................................................................................................................25

Design...................................................................................................................................................25

Justification.........................................................................................................................................26

VII.        Algorithms & Artificial Intelligence...................................................................................................28

The Case of Heineken.......................................................................................................................29

VIII.      Integration in Policing & Courtrooms................................................................................................32

Predictive Policing............................................................................................................................33

PredPol.................................................................................................................................................35

COMPAS..............................................................................................................................................42

The Case of Eric Loomis.................................................................................................................44

IX.          Constitutionality & Transparency.......................................................................................................48

Due Process........................................................................................................................................48

Trade-Secret Rights..........................................................................................................................50

Transparency......................................................................................................................................51

Predictive Parity................................................................................................................................52

X.            Synthesis & Analysis...............................................................................................................................53

Alternatives..........................................................................................................................................61

XI.          Conclusion..................................................................................................................................................64

Bibliography.............................................................................................................................................................67

Appendix A...............................................................................................................................................................71

About this Honors Thesis

Rights statement

• Permission granted by the author to include this thesis or dissertation in this repository. All rights reserved by the author. Please contact the author for information regarding the reproduction and use of this thesis or dissertation.

School	Emory College
Department	Philosophy
Degree	B.A.
Submission	Honors Thesis
Language	English
Research Field	Philosophy
Palavra-chave	philosophy justice courtrooms algorithms artificial intelligence
Committee Chair / Thesis Advisor	Bell, Jeremy, Emory University
Committee Members	Nalkur, Sonal, Emory University Huseyinzadegan, Dilek , Emory University

Última modificação

Primary PDF

Thumbnail	Title	Date Uploaded	Actions
	Algorithms in the Courtroom: A Philosophical Consideration of the Quantifiability of Justice ()	2021-04-12 16:23:18 -0400	Press to Select an action Download

Supplemental Files

Thumbnail	Title	Date Uploaded	Actions