Chicanx-Latinx Law Review

Shortly before America’s police brutality protests of 2020, a new term emerged for an old phenomenon in the criminal legal system: ghost warrants. These warrants are the result of outdated and sometimes inaccurate or incomplete information. Yet they continue to repeatedly land innocent people in jail, sometimes for months at a time. In essence, they haunt those they affect. During their detention, victims are susceptible to losing jobs, housing, and even family. Mistaken arrests disproportionately impact marginalized communities, specifically Black, Latine, poor, mentally ill, and immigrant populations. Hurdles compound when someone belongs to more than one of these communities or when they are the unfortunate victim of mistaken AI facial recognition.

Currently, there are few paths to clearing up such warrants, nor is there a widespread awareness among those with the power to create such pathways. A major underpinning of the challenge both victims and criminal defense attorneys face is the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule, where police who believe they are executing a valid warrant are not punished for mistakes made in its execution. The Supreme Court of the United States has thus far failed to acknowledge the systemic negligence resulting in mistaken arrests and therefore not incentivized law enforcement agencies to keep their records reasonably clear of mistakes. In 2023, it also denied certiorari in Sosa v. Martin Cnty., Fla., where a man named David Sosa had twice been arrested and detained on an out-of-state warrant for another David Sosa, despite an amicus brief from four other David Sosas. Without legal pathways to relief, victims of mistaken arrests are left with few options. But with a concerted effort between legals scholars, who bring analysis and awareness; legislators, who have the power to create change; and the judiciary, who has the power to enforce equitable measures, mistaken arrests could be drastically reduced.