What do you think?
Rate this book
Policing the Open Road: How Cars Transformed American Freedom
How the rise of the car, the symbol of American personal freedom, inadvertently led to ever more intrusive policing--with disastrous consequences for racial equality in our criminal justice system.
When Americans think of freedom, they often picture the open road. Yet nowhere are we more likely to encounter the long arm of the law than in our cars. Sarah Seo reveals how the rise of the automobile led us to accept—and expect—pervasive police power. As Policing the Open Road makes clear, this radical transformation in the nature and meaning of American freedom has had far-reaching political and legal consequences.
Before the twentieth century, most Americans rarely came into contact with police officers. But with more and more drivers behind the wheel, police departments rapidly expanded their forces and increased officers’ authority to stop citizens who violated traffic laws. The Fourth Amendment—the constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures—did not effectively shield individuals from government intrusion while driving. Instead, jurists interpreted the amendment narrowly. In a society dependent on cars, everyone—the law-breaking and law-abiding alike—would be subject to discretionary policing.
Seo overturns prevailing interpretations of the Warren Court’s due process revolution. The justices’ efforts to protect Americans did more to accommodate than to limit police intervention, and the new criminal procedures inadvertently sanctioned discrimination by officers of the law. Constitutional challenges to traffic stops largely failed, and motorists “driving while black” had little recourse to question police demands. Seo shows how procedures designed to safeguard us on the road ultimately undermined the nation’s commitment to equal protection before the law.
When Americans think of freedom, they often picture the open road. Yet nowhere are we more likely to encounter the long arm of the law than in our cars. Sarah Seo reveals how the rise of the automobile led us to accept—and expect—pervasive police power. As Policing the Open Road makes clear, this radical transformation in the nature and meaning of American freedom has had far-reaching political and legal consequences.
Before the twentieth century, most Americans rarely came into contact with police officers. But with more and more drivers behind the wheel, police departments rapidly expanded their forces and increased officers’ authority to stop citizens who violated traffic laws. The Fourth Amendment—the constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures—did not effectively shield individuals from government intrusion while driving. Instead, jurists interpreted the amendment narrowly. In a society dependent on cars, everyone—the law-breaking and law-abiding alike—would be subject to discretionary policing.
Seo overturns prevailing interpretations of the Warren Court’s due process revolution. The justices’ efforts to protect Americans did more to accommodate than to limit police intervention, and the new criminal procedures inadvertently sanctioned discrimination by officers of the law. Constitutional challenges to traffic stops largely failed, and motorists “driving while black” had little recourse to question police demands. Seo shows how procedures designed to safeguard us on the road ultimately undermined the nation’s commitment to equal protection before the law.
340 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 8, 2019
50 people are currently reading
1541 people want to read
About the author
Sarah A. Seo
1 book6 followersSarah A. Seo is Professor of Law at Columbia Law School, where she teaches criminal law and procedure and legal history. She clerked on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 39 reviews
March 30, 2020
Policing the Open Road is a work of legal history and commentary on the effect of cars on the Fourth Amendment rights that protect Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures. With the widespread adoption of cars came a slew of traffic laws that were so complex and voluminous that it was impossible for people to follow the law to a T. Once police were responsible for both the enforcement of traffic rules and investigating other crimes, traffic violations end up being a gateway to increased policing of people. This in itself is troubling, but given that every car on the road breaks traffic rules at some point, police were sanctioned with the ability to use their discretion when stoping vehicles, and the discretion meant that police could get away with more than they should have. Sarah Seo also explores the relationship between the rise of discretionary policing and the prohibition era, a gay legal scholar's quest to highlight the unjustness of traffic stops in the era of McCarthyism, the racist repercussions of discretionary policing, and the relevance of these legal precedents on policing the digital world.
If the history of the automotive Fourth Amendment can offer any insight today, it is this: As new forms of property and government regulation migrate from vehicular highways to the information superhighway, delineation between public and private will remain circumstantial, inconsistent, and highly proceduralized as long American society continues to depend on discretionary policing. In short, more litigation is in store.
January 25, 2020
Policing the Open Road is a very interesting, if somewhat depressing, history of how cars fundamentally changed American law enforcement. Really, though, it seemed like two separate narratives.
In the first half of the book, Seo discusses how the increased mobility made possible by cars led to a fundamental change in law enforcement, from a reactive model that depended heavily on private individuals to investigate and prosecute crimes, to a "preventive" policing model that had previously only been present in a few large cities. In the second half, she discusses how cars--along with the difficulty of enforcing Prohibition (and, later, drug laws)--led to changes in Fourth Amendment doctrine that gave police broad powers to stop essentially any car on a minor, pretextural, traffic violation and then search the entire car without a warrant. These changes led to fundamental alteration of the legal concept of "arrest," and greatly increased the average person's chances of having adversarial encounters with the police.
What Seo doesn't discuss in as much length as one might like (though she devotes about a chapter to it) is the rise of police combining these new powers with racial profiling to effectively create a "police state" environment for members of certain minority groups without alienating the majority of the population.
In the first half of the book, Seo discusses how the increased mobility made possible by cars led to a fundamental change in law enforcement, from a reactive model that depended heavily on private individuals to investigate and prosecute crimes, to a "preventive" policing model that had previously only been present in a few large cities. In the second half, she discusses how cars--along with the difficulty of enforcing Prohibition (and, later, drug laws)--led to changes in Fourth Amendment doctrine that gave police broad powers to stop essentially any car on a minor, pretextural, traffic violation and then search the entire car without a warrant. These changes led to fundamental alteration of the legal concept of "arrest," and greatly increased the average person's chances of having adversarial encounters with the police.
What Seo doesn't discuss in as much length as one might like (though she devotes about a chapter to it) is the rise of police combining these new powers with racial profiling to effectively create a "police state" environment for members of certain minority groups without alienating the majority of the population.
January 21, 2020
Do you live in America? If so, you should read this book.
(Actual review to come.)
(Actual review to come.)
January 15, 2026
1.5/5
Over the years, I've been told on repeated occasions that I should've gone into law. One of the few good things about a book like this is to show me how following that advice would've been a death sentence, whereupon I replaced my abusive family situation with an abusive legal structure drawn up by misogynistic slave holders and chokeholding the vast majority of US residents ever since. According to Seo, we should be grateful that the "Founding Fathers" accorded "us" privacy, as it is our only "legal" defense against trigger happy cops whose origins as slave catchers certainly have no bearing on their subsequent evolutions (anti-vagrancy laws, war on drugs, cordoning off mobility from the communal status of public transportation and funneling those can afford it into a panopticon game of run and gun). It makes for some extremely lazy generalizations and ludicrous assumptions, and reading it alongside This Nonviolent Stuff'll Get You Killed was a trip and a half of cognitive dissonance. If anything, I now understand even more deeply the mind of a settler state liberal—how much self-obfuscation is required at every step of the way, from the renaming of May Day into Law Day to 'oh the justices just forgot to account for anti-Blackness' time and time again, lest one begin to question just why we pay top dollars for an occupying army to skulk about our homes and hunt a certain abject portion of the citizenry for sport.
In the end, I'm grateful I ended up getting to this in the wake of Golden Gulag, Living My Life, and so much else, as such rid me of the temptation to treat this text and its Emma Goldman invocations by the most status quo white men that ever status quo as anything more than a ludicrous farce of self-aggrandizing appropriation. I gave another half star for allowing me to see into the minds of the "court" that would eventually strike down Roe v. Wade and has yet to ever vote against slavery, as it gives me a clear line to how irredeemably shackled the whole exercise is to a time when human trafficking was seen as good business practices. As Minneapolis shudders and writhes, I wonder what Seo would say regarding Renee Good's "Fourth Amendment Rights." Would she say the police's obligation to always be ready to shoot (lest some anarchist out of Dostoevsky's Demons start erratically biting people out in public) meant Good brought it upon herself? Or would she look around and say, this experiment in law has failed, as was doomed to happen on the lands of a settler state. God give me the strength to not see for myself.
Over the years, I've been told on repeated occasions that I should've gone into law. One of the few good things about a book like this is to show me how following that advice would've been a death sentence, whereupon I replaced my abusive family situation with an abusive legal structure drawn up by misogynistic slave holders and chokeholding the vast majority of US residents ever since. According to Seo, we should be grateful that the "Founding Fathers" accorded "us" privacy, as it is our only "legal" defense against trigger happy cops whose origins as slave catchers certainly have no bearing on their subsequent evolutions (anti-vagrancy laws, war on drugs, cordoning off mobility from the communal status of public transportation and funneling those can afford it into a panopticon game of run and gun). It makes for some extremely lazy generalizations and ludicrous assumptions, and reading it alongside This Nonviolent Stuff'll Get You Killed was a trip and a half of cognitive dissonance. If anything, I now understand even more deeply the mind of a settler state liberal—how much self-obfuscation is required at every step of the way, from the renaming of May Day into Law Day to 'oh the justices just forgot to account for anti-Blackness' time and time again, lest one begin to question just why we pay top dollars for an occupying army to skulk about our homes and hunt a certain abject portion of the citizenry for sport.
In the end, I'm grateful I ended up getting to this in the wake of Golden Gulag, Living My Life, and so much else, as such rid me of the temptation to treat this text and its Emma Goldman invocations by the most status quo white men that ever status quo as anything more than a ludicrous farce of self-aggrandizing appropriation. I gave another half star for allowing me to see into the minds of the "court" that would eventually strike down Roe v. Wade and has yet to ever vote against slavery, as it gives me a clear line to how irredeemably shackled the whole exercise is to a time when human trafficking was seen as good business practices. As Minneapolis shudders and writhes, I wonder what Seo would say regarding Renee Good's "Fourth Amendment Rights." Would she say the police's obligation to always be ready to shoot (lest some anarchist out of Dostoevsky's Demons start erratically biting people out in public) meant Good brought it upon herself? Or would she look around and say, this experiment in law has failed, as was doomed to happen on the lands of a settler state. God give me the strength to not see for myself.
February 18, 2020
Less about the police and even less about cars, this is a basic overview of 4th Amendment case law of the 20th Century that does back flips to explain and excuse the Court's sanctioning of a growing police state. Little history or context how policing has protected capitalist interests and white supremacy, with minor racial analysis and zero class or capitalist critique. Disappointment to say the least; only for legal scholars--and even then, I'm not sure.
April 6, 2025
Not that I need another reason to hate cars and police, but
Like most books around this topic, simultaneously fascinating and disheartening. Somehow Americans decided we were okay with tens of thousands of people dying and being injured every year along with ever expanding police power just for the sake of driving (and don’t get me started on environmental and financial concerns, which I have separate book recs for). The author does a great job of keeping a legal history engaging and relevant as she highlights the most influential events and cases. Watching the interplay of cars, sexism, racism, classism, legal rights, and prohibition play out made for a great read.
Like most books around this topic, simultaneously fascinating and disheartening. Somehow Americans decided we were okay with tens of thousands of people dying and being injured every year along with ever expanding police power just for the sake of driving (and don’t get me started on environmental and financial concerns, which I have separate book recs for). The author does a great job of keeping a legal history engaging and relevant as she highlights the most influential events and cases. Watching the interplay of cars, sexism, racism, classism, legal rights, and prohibition play out made for a great read.
August 23, 2023
Torch And Pitchfork Selection, Aug 2023
This really underlined the importance of police reform. Law enforcement kinda accidentally stumbled into traffic enforcement, and it would be much better for civil liberties if those were separated again. I'm very sad I missed the chance to discuss this.
This really underlined the importance of police reform. Law enforcement kinda accidentally stumbled into traffic enforcement, and it would be much better for civil liberties if those were separated again. I'm very sad I missed the chance to discuss this.
November 9, 2021
A massive topic, to be sure, but I really appreciate how she narrowed the scope of it to be focused on 4th Amendment cases alone. I love the intersection between freedom, law, and society, and how all were redefined over the past century, especially by the courts. A bit dense at times, but was extremely informative and very interesting.
May 17, 2024
This would have made a fantastic mid-length essay. I appreciate the academic curiosity and the new lens applied to this issue, but the book was much too dense and repetitive. It seems vaguely wrong that I finished reading all the more secure in my licencelessness.
did-not-finish
November 16, 2020I can't do it! I feel so torn about this but the writing is just not for me. I am finding it too dull to hold my attention even though I am highly interested in the subject matter. I feel especially guilty because the Saskatoon Public Library bought this specifically on my request.
That said, I did glean some pretty fascinating information from the chapters I got through. I will try and pick this up again in the winter when I have less distractions in my life. Summers in Saskatoon are too short to read books that are slogs.
That said, I did glean some pretty fascinating information from the chapters I got through. I will try and pick this up again in the winter when I have less distractions in my life. Summers in Saskatoon are too short to read books that are slogs.
April 13, 2021
Seo gives a dispassionate review of 4th amendment law as it intersects with traffic stops and the automobile. The kernel of an idea is interesting, and the book is well-researched, but it reads like an extended law review article and misses a big opportunity to explore what the history actually means. I'm rounding up because of its core insight and wealth of data, but I found it to be as dry and unenjoyable a read as a book on civil rights can be.
The first part of the thesis relates to how the automobile changed the nature of policing, and this is covered in the first two chapters (at length). Everything that follows then is basically about how policing the automobile changed 4th amendment law. Because the book essentially just follows legal outcomes, Seo actually goes out of her way to frame the story as a battle of Everyman, since jurists were not concerned with discriminatory policing but arbitrary policing. Apart from the occasional anecdote, it doesn't even actually get to discriminatory policing until basically the very end of the last chapter before the epilogue.
The writing is exceptionally dry and academic. There are only two parts of the book that aren't basically a "this and this and this" rundown of legal history, both of which still follow that format: the opening chapters (which is a pretty linear history of mostly August Vollmer, who was a major figure in professionalization of the police force, and its motorization), and a chunk in the middle that just had paragraph after paragraph from incidents in ACLU and NAACP files of individuals questioning their own traffic stop experiences. Otherwise, it's a rundown of case details and outcomes, written by a lawyer.
The book really misses a huge opportunity to say something. Essentially, the big point is made in Chapters 1 and 3, and the rest of the book is just watching the slowly unfolding ramifications of those two events (Chapter 2 in particular feels exceptionally redundant with Chapter 1). IMO, Seo misses a huge opportunity to actually comment on the legal outcomes - she essentially has made the case for an "original sin" in 4th amendment law, that of Carroll v. United States which could have defined the car as a private space but chose instead to treat it publicly, which led to a host of "reasonableness" infecting every aspect of how the car inhabits this gray area. However, she never actually uses this frame -- she doesn't suggest that the law got it wrong, nor does she even explore the ramifications of an alternative outcome, even though it is really the lynchpin of her book. Even though she repeatedly calls back to Carroll, she doesn't even try to draw a summary straight line through the major cases referenced to really bring home how this chain of events led to discriminatory policing. To me, this all feels like a massive missed opportunity to actually flesh out the design and intentionality of what has transpired or what could have instead, and instead Seo goes out of her way to not say anything and let the legal texts stand by themselves. This is beyond frustrating.
At the end of the day, I don't think I'd recommend this book to folks without an interest in 4th amendment law. It is so drenched in legal text, down to the author's completely dispassionate writing style, that it turns a discussion of civil liberties into something that is downright boring. The core of the book is a brilliant insight, but the desire not to do anything but flesh out that insight neuters the book's impact.
The first part of the thesis relates to how the automobile changed the nature of policing, and this is covered in the first two chapters (at length). Everything that follows then is basically about how policing the automobile changed 4th amendment law. Because the book essentially just follows legal outcomes, Seo actually goes out of her way to frame the story as a battle of Everyman, since jurists were not concerned with discriminatory policing but arbitrary policing. Apart from the occasional anecdote, it doesn't even actually get to discriminatory policing until basically the very end of the last chapter before the epilogue.
The writing is exceptionally dry and academic. There are only two parts of the book that aren't basically a "this and this and this" rundown of legal history, both of which still follow that format: the opening chapters (which is a pretty linear history of mostly August Vollmer, who was a major figure in professionalization of the police force, and its motorization), and a chunk in the middle that just had paragraph after paragraph from incidents in ACLU and NAACP files of individuals questioning their own traffic stop experiences. Otherwise, it's a rundown of case details and outcomes, written by a lawyer.
The book really misses a huge opportunity to say something. Essentially, the big point is made in Chapters 1 and 3, and the rest of the book is just watching the slowly unfolding ramifications of those two events (Chapter 2 in particular feels exceptionally redundant with Chapter 1). IMO, Seo misses a huge opportunity to actually comment on the legal outcomes - she essentially has made the case for an "original sin" in 4th amendment law, that of Carroll v. United States which could have defined the car as a private space but chose instead to treat it publicly, which led to a host of "reasonableness" infecting every aspect of how the car inhabits this gray area. However, she never actually uses this frame -- she doesn't suggest that the law got it wrong, nor does she even explore the ramifications of an alternative outcome, even though it is really the lynchpin of her book. Even though she repeatedly calls back to Carroll, she doesn't even try to draw a summary straight line through the major cases referenced to really bring home how this chain of events led to discriminatory policing. To me, this all feels like a massive missed opportunity to actually flesh out the design and intentionality of what has transpired or what could have instead, and instead Seo goes out of her way to not say anything and let the legal texts stand by themselves. This is beyond frustrating.
At the end of the day, I don't think I'd recommend this book to folks without an interest in 4th amendment law. It is so drenched in legal text, down to the author's completely dispassionate writing style, that it turns a discussion of civil liberties into something that is downright boring. The core of the book is a brilliant insight, but the desire not to do anything but flesh out that insight neuters the book's impact.
March 15, 2022
One of the most insidious aspects of car culture is the affect it has had on policing. In brief, the advent of prohibition during the growth of automobility led to seemingly radical changes in 4th and 14th Amendment rights, the advent of discretionary policing (that is, giving police authority to search private property without a warrant), and a tacit approval of discriminatory law enforcement particularly tied to the war on drugs.
Seo goes into a great deal of detail tracing the cascading effects of case law on search and seizure related to automobiles and how that in turn led to wider interpretations of what is "public" and what is "private." It also led to "stop and frisk" laws allowing searches of property and persons based solely on the discretion of the law enforcement officer (LEO) WITHOUT first arresting a person.
Much has changed because of the motor vehicle, much of it for the worse. The gutting of the 4th and 14th Amendments, traffic laws making the Everyman a potential criminal, and expansion of discretionary LEO powers are the most egregious.
I feel this is an important work that sheds light on an aspect of automobility that most of us are unaware of. I certainly was but am no longer.
Seo goes into a great deal of detail tracing the cascading effects of case law on search and seizure related to automobiles and how that in turn led to wider interpretations of what is "public" and what is "private." It also led to "stop and frisk" laws allowing searches of property and persons based solely on the discretion of the law enforcement officer (LEO) WITHOUT first arresting a person.
Much has changed because of the motor vehicle, much of it for the worse. The gutting of the 4th and 14th Amendments, traffic laws making the Everyman a potential criminal, and expansion of discretionary LEO powers are the most egregious.
I feel this is an important work that sheds light on an aspect of automobility that most of us are unaware of. I certainly was but am no longer.
August 17, 2020
This book is about discretionary policing, its history, and the US Supreme Court's legal gymnastics to justify it. Focusing on the automobile, Seo writes about how policing--while initially concerned about traffic safety--eventually became a tool for racial profiling and unfettered state power.
Seo's insights about police power are obvious (and personal) to many. While Seo does a great job in explaining the legal background of discretionary policing, she does fall short in giving us her assessments about whether our current model of discretionary policing can ever change. And, if so, how can we change it?
Too often discretionary policing is arbitrary policing. Arbitrary policing is discriminatory policing. It undermines trust in far too many communities and hinders police-citizen cooperation on violent crime. How can we change this? What are different ways to think about the police-citizen relationship?
While this book is probably one chapter too short, Seo does a great job of setting the stage to help us answer these questions.
Seo's insights about police power are obvious (and personal) to many. While Seo does a great job in explaining the legal background of discretionary policing, she does fall short in giving us her assessments about whether our current model of discretionary policing can ever change. And, if so, how can we change it?
Too often discretionary policing is arbitrary policing. Arbitrary policing is discriminatory policing. It undermines trust in far too many communities and hinders police-citizen cooperation on violent crime. How can we change this? What are different ways to think about the police-citizen relationship?
While this book is probably one chapter too short, Seo does a great job of setting the stage to help us answer these questions.
October 26, 2020
I'm very surprised this book doesn't have higher ratings.
Seo masterfully explores the history of policing, cars, and judicial attempts to determine the scope of the 4th amendment. This book made me view policing and discretion in an entirely new light, and reframed the way I think about traffic enforcement.
In particular, she does a great job separating the policing of automobiles from other forms of policing, in that everyone experiences it, and it is likely the most common way most people interact with police. The police car and the traffic stop are, essentially, the archetype of modern policing. She also does a great job of showing how case law increasing police discretion has directly impacted minority groups.
Overall, a very good read. Seo is a good storyteller, and I walked away looking at the world quite differently than when I started.
I should also add that the photographs Seo selected are the best I've seen in a book like this. Really well done.
Seo masterfully explores the history of policing, cars, and judicial attempts to determine the scope of the 4th amendment. This book made me view policing and discretion in an entirely new light, and reframed the way I think about traffic enforcement.
In particular, she does a great job separating the policing of automobiles from other forms of policing, in that everyone experiences it, and it is likely the most common way most people interact with police. The police car and the traffic stop are, essentially, the archetype of modern policing. She also does a great job of showing how case law increasing police discretion has directly impacted minority groups.
Overall, a very good read. Seo is a good storyteller, and I walked away looking at the world quite differently than when I started.
I should also add that the photographs Seo selected are the best I've seen in a book like this. Really well done.
May 1, 2021
This book is a fascinating, in-depth look at how modern policing in America was shaped by the advent of the automobile. Seo wields an impressive array of research, including various court cases from the past century, and weaves together a compelling and coherent argument that the automobile fundamentally challenged long-held traditions of public and private spheres of life, and essentially caused the creation of modern law enforcement. It’s not an easy read, and that’s largely because of the analysis the subject requires, but I think it could have been more readable. Some passages felt needlessly repetitive, while others glossed over topics that could have stood more explanation. Still, this book presents some important information for Americans and other countries where a balance is perpetually sought between freedom, privacy, and public safety.
December 5, 2020
Really compelling thesis but ultimately not the book I was hoping for. I had listened to the 99% invisible podcast in which the author was interviewed and was super intrigued and wanted to dig more into the idea that the rise of the automobile concides and is directly related to the buildup of the "discretionary police state" we live in today. And while that idea is there it is bogged down by a legal analysis of the relationship the fourth amendment has to the car and jumps around in time causing me to lose track of the argument. Overall it felt too concerned with Supreme Court arguments and less concerned with real world tangible experiences. I'd just recommend the podcast interview, unless you want to tip your toes in a law test book.
June 8, 2024
I really appreciated the authors view on the progression of policing from the advent and wide adoption of the automobile in America. It’s a really logical path to follow: through prohibition, into Supreme Court cases that altered the way we legally view the 4th amendment, and into the more racialized policing that exists in the present.
I understand that the purpose of this books argument was to trace the line the increasing of American policing through the 20th century, mostly, by following the way that the 4th amendment was interpreted by judges, but I feel like the added historical context of police forces being descended from “escaped slave patrols” would have been a welcome addition to the argument. The police didn’t “become” racist — the core of the entire institution is rooted in racism. Also, ACAB.
I understand that the purpose of this books argument was to trace the line the increasing of American policing through the 20th century, mostly, by following the way that the 4th amendment was interpreted by judges, but I feel like the added historical context of police forces being descended from “escaped slave patrols” would have been a welcome addition to the argument. The police didn’t “become” racist — the core of the entire institution is rooted in racism. Also, ACAB.
December 23, 2020
Rarely does a book force me to rethink history as much as this one did. The first half of the book is the more compelling for me - thinking about the interconnections between the introduction of cars (mobility beyond community), prohibition (private mobile hiding spaces for crime) and policing was truly fascinating. The second half of the book reads more about legal cases, the fourth amendment, and soforth - interesting, but more legal scholarly than history and culture.
Recommend this book for folks working to think through how to create safe traffic while reducing problematic police interactions.
Recommend this book for folks working to think through how to create safe traffic while reducing problematic police interactions.
August 27, 2020
The best book I have read on the history of the highway system and its intersections with police practices and legal precedent. Demonstrating and explaining differences on where a officer can search, when an officer can search, and what is private and public. This book was jam packed with information and very informative.
Sadly it is also very relevant to the daily killings of people of color in this country. This book will show the history of how the make up of a police force contributes to systemic racism and negative policing.
Sadly it is also very relevant to the daily killings of people of color in this country. This book will show the history of how the make up of a police force contributes to systemic racism and negative policing.
July 8, 2021
This was very informative on the issue of policing case law and how it affects US citizens. The book begins with an early 1900s police shooting of a citizen in a car and the backlash from the public as well as their overall view of policing concerning cars. The rest of the book is the slippery slope where the view of a car becomes more of a public space, accessible to search and seizure as long as there is a 'reasonable cause.' The book gets a little dry for a general reader not wanting to study case law. As a whole, this is a great introduction into the history of policing cars is America.
November 13, 2023
The author of this book went on the war on cars podcast to share the central idea of how our increasing dependence on the automobile led to the societal state of overpolicing, which is a very interesting and relevant conclusion. Her interview on the podcast made me want to check this book out, which was very well researched and had lots of case law, but was a little bit over my reading level. Kind of wish I had just stuck with the podcast
April 4, 2024
A fascinating study into how the introduction of the car and the new individualized mobility it brought along radically upended the structure of the American legal landscape and changed law enforcement practices. As someone who is vehemently anti-car, I found the neutral tone on automobiles themselves to be rather refreshing, as it shifted the focus onto how governments reacted to the introduction of the car, as opposed to an appraisal of the car itself.
April 22, 2020
Seems like this book ended a little too soon as policing moved to discriminatory policing and the legal arguments shifted from the Fourth to the Fourteenth amendment. But, the focus was the Fourth. Some minor legal jargon that makes it difficult for a lay reader, but overall thoroughly researched and well written. Fascinating history. Cars still suck, for so many reasons.
September 17, 2020
Admittedly, I wasn’t able to complete this book before I had to return it to the library. It was extremely well researched and gave a thorough account of policing and laws with the widespread accessibility of the automobile. It was very dense on law theory and that was hard for my “designer” brain to comprehend sometimes.
March 5, 2023
Solid listen. Gels with a lot I have been reading/listening to recently - not just all of the urban planning things, but also Seek and Hide. While cars are associated strongly in American culture with "freedom", in many ways the development of car culture has contributed to the loss of privacy rights
September 22, 2020
Interesting take on how an innovation in industry could be linked to one of the toughest challenges we face as a nation. Certainly a book to create a new perspective on this topic, read with an open mind.
April 28, 2021
Phenomenal book that traces how car culture in the US reshaped American policing and 4th amendment rights in the early and mid 20th century. Accessibly written, fast moving, and information dense. Probably the m0st recommendable book I've read so far this year
February 4, 2023
A thorough and insightful analysis about how the advent of the automobile drove ambiguity into traditional privacy rights, resulting in a more expansive role for law enforcement and further disparity in the treatment of minorities and the poor
April 17, 2023
An interesting analysis of the role of the automotive revolution in expanding the police state; would be interested to read more about how the Fourth Amendment evolution that Seo discusses relates to other areas, such as technology or abortion.
June 17, 2024
I only got about halfway through, but didn't finish it.
Well researched, I just couldn't get into it. I was surprised to learn how the invention of the car has changed policing for what send to be the worse
Well researched, I just couldn't get into it. I was surprised to learn how the invention of the car has changed policing for what send to be the worse
Displaying 1 - 30 of 39 reviews