Technological due process¶
Citron, D. K. (2008). Technological due process. Washington University Law Review, 85(6), 1249-1313.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Procedural Fairness (Due Process)
- Algorithmic and Platform Governance. The emergence of algorithmic decision-making in lending, hiring, content moderation, criminal risk assessment, and benefits adjudication has revived procedural fairness as a centerpiece of algorithmic accountability and AI governance, a shift Citron (2008) named "technological due process"—the project of porting notice, hearing, and reasoned-justification protections into rule-bound automated systems.
This sourceDiagnoses the erosion of classical procedural protections in automated administrative decision-making (e.g., benefits eligibility, no-fly lists) and proposes "technological due process": embedding transparency, audit trails, testing, and rule-articulation requirements directly into the design of governmental decision systems.
- Algorithmic and Platform Governance. The emergence of algorithmic decision-making in lending, hiring, content moderation, criminal risk assessment, and benefits adjudication has revived procedural fairness as a centerpiece of algorithmic accountability and AI governance, a shift Citron (2008) named "technological due process"—the project of porting notice, hearing, and reasoned-justification protections into rule-bound automated systems.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. The single citation of this work carries no recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:89fbf46e1168 · see in the full table