BLACK mobile logo

detroit

politics

Appeals court rules Detroit ShotSpotter contracts violated oversight law

October 15, 2025

The Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that Detroit's contracts for ShotSpotter police surveillance technology violated the city's Community Input Over Government Surveillance (CIOGS) ordinance, which requires public disclosure of surveillance technology details before hearings. The court found the city held multiple public meetings before publishing the required oversight report, though they stopped short of nullifying the $7 million contracts, leaving that decision to a lower court. The case centers on ensuring proper public information and transparency when surveillance technologies are considered, with attorney John Philo emphasizing that informed public debate about such technologies is essential to democratic governance.

Who is affected

  • Detroit residents who pushed for the oversight ordinance
  • Community members subject to ShotSpotter surveillance
  • Police oversight groups concerned about the technology's effectiveness
  • Detroit Justice Center and Sugar Law Center who filed the lawsuit
  • City departments implementing surveillance technology
  • Detroit City Council responsible for contract approvals

What action is being taken

  • The Michigan Court of Appeals is overturning a lower court ruling that had favored the city
  • The case is being sent back to a lower court to determine the appropriate remedy
  • ShotSpotter technology continues to be used in Detroit despite the legal challenge
  • The city's Law Department is defending its implementation of surveillance technology
  • Police officials are publicly promoting ShotSpotter's effectiveness in law enforcement

Why it matters

  • The case establishes that procedural safeguards for surveillance technology implementation cannot be treated as "mere technicalities"
  • It reinforces that proper public oversight requires informed citizens before contracts are approved
  • The ruling may impact how cities implement surveillance technologies and follow oversight ordinances
  • It highlights tensions between government efficiency and transparency requirements
  • The case demonstrates the importance of community input regarding technologies that impact civil liberties

What's next

  • A lower court will determine whether the contracts can remain in place despite the violation
  • The $7 million expansion contract will continue running until its expiration on June 30, 2026, unless voided by the court
  • No explicit next steps stated in the article

Read full article from source: bridgedetroit.com