Anne Boustead

Interests

Research

public policy; policy analysis; drugs; surveillance; privacy; policing; research methods

Teaching

public policy; policy analysis; drug policy; technology policy; research methods

Courses

Scholarly Contributions

Journals/Publications

• Boustead, A. (2019). The Tools at Hand: Surveillance Innovations and the Shifting Role of Federal Law Enforcement in Drug Control. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law.
  More info

  Although enforcement is a key component of any drug prohibition scheme, changes in enforcement capabilities frequently occur independently of efforts by policymakers to manage the sometimes-conflicting public health and law enforcement aspects of drug policy. Since its passage in 1970, the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) has been amended several times to enhance enforcement of drug laws. Simultaneously, the surveillance tools available to law enforcement officers investigating narcotics crimes have become exponentially more powerful. By functioning as a force multiplier, these surveillance tools can fundamentally shift the ability of federal law enforcement to enforce drug laws, and consequently further augment the role of federal law enforcement in drug control efforts. However, the role of surveillance innovations in molding federal enforcement of drug laws has not yet been systematically analyzed in the context of the post-CSA policy environment. In this paper, I explore the relationship between efforts to enforce the regulatory scheme established by the CSA and the development of surveillance infrastructure in the United States over the last 50 years. I pay particular attention to how the role of the federal law enforcement in drug control has been shaped by advancements in law enforcement surveillance capabilities, and argue that efforts to understand the policy changes brought about by the CSA are likely to be incomplete unless they also consider intervening changes in surveillance capabilities. I conclude by discussing the implications of this analysis for future efforts to reform the CSA.
• Boustead, A., & Shackleford, S. (2020). State of Hoosier Cybersecurity 2020. Indiana Business Research Center.
  More info

  As is the case in many jurisdictions, public and private organizations in Indiana are unfortunately no stranger to cyber attacks. Counties across the state such as Lake, Lawrence, and LaPorte have been targeted by criminals in recent ransomware campaigns, leading to hundreds of thousands in losses. Healthcare providers such as Hancock Memorial Hospital have been similarly breached, as have universities, small business, utilities, and school corporations. Yet it has proven difficult to understand the full scope of these cyber threats, and how Hoosier organizations are attempting to prevent and respond to them.To get a more complete picture of Hoosier cyber risk planning, the Legal and Insurance working group of the Indiana Executive Cybersecurity Council, in collaboration with researchers at Indiana University and the University of Arizona, conducted this study to help explore how Indiana organizations perceive and manage cyber risks. We pay particular attention to the role of insurance as part of an overarching cyber risk mitigation strategy. The report is broken down into the following sections. Section 1 offers background on the technical, organizational, and legal dimensions of the cyber threat, along with a policy review highlighting recent primarily state-level efforts in Indiana and beyond to better manage cyber risk. Section 2 reviews the methods used in this study. Section 3 summarizes our results, paying particular attention to such topics as risk perceptions, management, and the evolving role of cyber risk insurance. Section 4 concludes the study with a look at policy opportunities to address the vulnerabilities and governance gaps revealed by the survey.This goal of this report is to provide business leaders, policymakers, law enforcement professionals, and all Hoosiers with important information about cyber readiness, help organizations of all sizes better understand current cyber threats facing Indiana, and describe current efforts to address them. In the end, cybersecurity is a team sport,and we’re all in this together.
• BOUSTEAD, A. E. (2018). Small Towns, Big Companies: How Surveillance Intermediaries Affect Small and Midsize Law Enforcement Agencies. Hoover Institution, Aegis Series Paper.
• Sarvet, A. L., Wall, M. M., Fink, D. S., Greene, E., Le, A., Boustead, A. E., Pacula, R. L., Keyes, K. M., Cerd'a, M., Galea, S., & others, . (2018). Medical marijuana laws and adolescent marijuana use in the United States: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Addiction.
• Balkovich, E., Prosnitz, D., Isley, S. C., Boustead, A. E., & Triezenberg, B. (2017). Helping Law Enforcement Use Data from Mobile Applications. RAND Reports.
• Boustead, A. (2017). A Legislator's Guide to Reauthorizing Section 702. Belfer Center Paper.
• Shackelford, S. J., Schneier, B., Sulmeyer, M., Boustead, A., Buchanan, B., Deckard, A., Herr, T., & Smith, J. M. (2016). Making Democracy Harder to Hack. U. Mich. JL Reform, 50, 629.
• Yerukhimovich, A., Balebako, R., Boustead, A., Cunningham, R. K., Welser, W., Housley, R., Shay, R., Spensky, C., Stanley, K. D., Stewart, J., Trachtenberg, A., & Winkelman, Z. (2016). Can Smartphones and Privacy Coexist? Assessing Technologies and Regulations Protecting Personal Data on Android and iOS Devies. RAND Reports.
• Balkovich, E., Prosnitz, D., Boustead, A., & Isley, S. C. (2015). Electronic Surveillance of Mobile Devices: Understanding the Mobile Ecosystem and Applicable Surveillance Law. RAND Reports.
• Boustead, A. E., & Stanley, K. D. (2015). The Legal and Policy Road Ahead: An Analysis of Public Comments in NHTSA's Vehicle-to-Vehicle Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Minn. JL Sci. & Tech., 16, 693.
• Wynn, B. O., & Boustead, A. (2015). Home Health Care for California's Injured Workers: Options for Implementing a Fee Schedule. Rand Health Quarterly, 5(1).
• Pacula, R. L., Boustead, A. E., & Hunt, P. (2014). Words Can Be Deceiving: A Review of Variation Among Legally Effective Medical Marijuana Laws in the United States. Journal of Drug Policy Analysis, 7(1), 1--19.

Presentations

• Baldwin-Rowe, J., Joshi, N., McCann, L., Boustead, A., Baldwin, E., Lien, A., & Evans, T. (2021). Rural vs. urban differences in COVID-19 legal response. American Public Health Association Annual Meeting.
• Evans, T., Lien, A., Boustead, A., Baldwin, E., Zimmer, A., McCann, L., Joshi, N., & Rowitt, J. (2021, October). Rural vs. urban differences in COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions. American Public Health Association Annual Meeting. Online: American Public Health Association.
• Evans, T., McCann, L., Joshi, N., Baldwin, E., Boustead, A., & Lien, A. (2021, November). Design of a national database of state and local COVID-19 policies using the institutional grammar. Institutional Grammar Research Institute Seminar. Online: Syracuse University.
• Boustead, A. (2020, February 2020). The Tools at Hand: Surveillance Innovations and the Shifting Role of Federal Law Enforcement in Drug Control. Controlled Substances Act at 50 Years Symposium.
  More info

  Although enforcement is a key component of any drug prohibition scheme, changes in enforcement capabilities frequently occur independently of efforts by policymakers to manage the sometimes-conflicting public health and law enforcement aspects of drug policy. Since its passage in 1970, the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) has been amended several times to enhance enforcement of drug laws. Simultaneously, the surveillance tools available to law enforcement officers investigating narcotics crimes have become exponentially more powerful. By functioning as a force multiplier, these surveillance tools can fundamentally shift the ability of federal law enforcement to enforce drug laws, and consequently further augment the role of federal law enforcement in drug control efforts. However, the role of surveillance innovations in molding federal enforcement of drug laws has not yet been systematically analyzed in the context of the post-CSA policy environment. In this paper, I explore the relationship between efforts to enforce the regulatory scheme established by the CSA and the development of surveillance infrastructure in the United States over the last 50 years. I pay particular attention to how the role of the federal law enforcement in drug control has been shaped by advancements in law enforcement surveillance capabilities, and argue that efforts to understand the policy changes brought about by the CSA are likely to be incomplete unless they also consider intervening changes in surveillance capabilities. I conclude by discussing the implications of this analysis for future efforts to reform the CSA.
• Boustead, A. (2019, Fall 2019). The Impact of Marijuana Outlet Density on DUI Arrests and Substance-Related Fatal Accidents. APPAM Fall Research Conference 2019.
  More info

  Intoxicated operation of motor vehicles is a pervasive and significant threat to public health and safety in the United States: in 2016, more than 1 million people were arrested for driving under the influence and more than 10,000 people were killed in alcohol-related car accidents (CDC 2019). As increased marijuana availability may change consumption of alcohol and opioids (Subbaraman 2016, Powell et al. 2018), policymakers and advocates have argued that marijuana legalization may decrease driving under the influence and related harms. Prior research has demonstrated a relationship between the passage of medical marijuana laws and a reduction in alcohol-related (Anderson, Hansen, and Rees 2013) and opioid-related traffic fatalities (Kim et al. 2016). These prior studies are based on state-level measures of marijuana legalization; however, in practice the availability of marijuana varies substantially both within and across states that have legalized medical or recreational marijuana. Accounting for local variation in marijuana availability will lead to better estimates of the effects of marijuana legalization on driving under the influence, and improved policymaking related to intoxicating substances.In this paper, I use novel measures of marijuana outlet density to evaluate the effects of state-recognized sources of marijuana on DUI arrests and alcohol-related fatal accidents. Drawing from a dataset comprised of the address, opening date, and closing date of all state-licensed medical and recreational marijuana in 18 states, marijuana outlet density is measured on the county level by the percent of the population within 5, 25, and 50 miles of any state-licensed marijuana outlet. Data on DUI arrests are obtained through Uniform Crime Reports county-level dataset; data on alcohol and opioid related marijuana traffic fatalities are obtained through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Fatality Analysis Reporting System Data. Difference-in-difference analysis is used to analyze the effect of marijuana outlet density on DUI arrests and fatal accidents. When complete, this analysis will provide policymakers with vital information on the public health and safety effects of legally recognized sources of marijuana.
• Boustead, A. (2019, June 2019). Intergovernmental Cooperation in Electronic Surveillance. Privacy Law Scholars Conference 2019.
  More info

  There is much still unknown about how law enforcement surveillance behavior is shaped by legal and contextual constraints. One area of particular pragmatic interest is the relationship between electronic surveillance use by federal law enforcement and electronic surveillance use by state/local law enforcement. On one hand, intergovernmental cooperation is vital for protecting public safety and national security. If intergovernmental cooperation in electronic surveillance does not appear to be widespread, then federal and state policymakers may wish to take steps to further encourage this behavior. On the other hand, states governments can – and have – crafted stronger protections for their citizens than those provided by the federal government. If cooperation between federal and state law enforcement hinders these state protections, then state policymakers may seek to ensure that their policy preferences remain effective. However, despite the importance of this issue, few studies to date have investigated intergovernmental cooperation in electronic surveillance. In this paper, I explore the relationship between federal and state/local law enforcement cooperation and use of electronic surveillance in the context of wiretap use. I begin by discussing existing (and unexplained) variation in surveillance use across jurisdictions, analyze potential two mechanisms through which interagency cooperation could change how law enforcement conducts electronic surveillance, and describe the federal and state rules governing law enforcement use of wiretaps. Next, I empirically explore the effect of intergovernmental cooperation on electronic surveillance use using data extracted from the Wiretap Reports. Specifically, I seek to answer two questions: does the development of state-level wiretap capabilities change the use of wiretaps on the federal level and, based on evidence from California, is there an association between the presence of a federal law enforcement office in a locality and the locality’s uptake of wiretap use? Using a difference-in-difference analysis, I find that state level wiretap capabilities have no effect on wiretap requests in federal court; using survival analysis, I find that the presence of a federal law enforcement agency office in a locality is associated with a decrease in the time it takes for state-level wiretap authorizations requests to be made in that locality. I conclude with a discussion how these results might inform our understanding of law enforcement surveillance behaviors, and the policy implications for privacy and public safety.
• Boustead, A. (2018, December). Privacy Protections and Law Enforcement Use of Prescription Drug Monitoring Databases. Workshop on Economics & Privacy, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School and the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law.
• Boustead, A. (2018, July). Privacy Protections and Law Enforcement Use of Prescription Drug Monitoring Databases. Small Group Session on Technology, Surveillance & Health at the Data & Society Research Institute.
• Boustead, A. (2018, May). Privacy Protections and Law Enforcement Use of Prescription Drug Monitoring Databases. Privacy Law Scholars Conference.
• Boustead, A. (2018, November). The Impact of State-Licensed Marijuana Outlets on Opioid-Related Outcomes. 2018 APPAM Fall Research Conference.
• Boustead, A. (2018, November). The Impact of State-Licensed Marijuana Outlets on Opioid-Related Outcomes. Southern Economic Association Annual Meeting.

Others

• Boustead, A. E. (2016, September). Police, Process, and Privacy Three Essays on the Third Party Doctrine. https://www.rand.org/pubs/rgs_dissertations/RGSD384.html