Policing issues according to 4 AIs

I asked the same questions to four AI interfaces and got a variety of results. Help me rank them (the results), please. I used Grok, CoPilot, Gemini, and Chat GPT. I am reporting the results in four sequential posts for brevity.

I gave all four the same prompt – change the dates and try it yourself with your choice.​

Act as a research analyst and identify the top three most significant developments in policing from the past 90 days (from 1 May 2025 to 1 August 2025). For each development, provide a concise summary of what happened, name the key players or institutions involved, and explain the potential second-order effects for professionals in the field (such as policymakers, investors, startup operators, or researchers). Include at least one credible source or citation for each development. Emphasize clarity, relevance, and why each event matters in the broader context of the field’s evolution. Your output should be structured, insightful, and actionable.

Gemini responded:

As a research analyst, I have identified and analyzed three significant developments in policing from May 1, 2025, to August 1, 2025. My analysis is grounded in primary sources and focuses on structural and systemic changes with long-term implications.

1. Supreme Court Rejects “Moment-of-Threat” Doctrine
   Summary: The U.S. Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, rejected the “moment-of-threat” doctrine that had been used by some lower courts to narrowly evaluate police use of deadly force. The ruling in Barnes v. Felix reaffirms that courts must consider the “totality of the circumstances,” including events leading up to the use of force, when assessing an officer’s actions under the Fourth Amendment’s “objective reasonableness” standard.
   Key Players:

• The U.S. Supreme Court: Delivered the unanimous opinion, providing a clear and binding precedent.
• The Policing Project at NYU Law: Wrote an amicus brief cited in a concurring opinion, advocating for the broader “totality of circumstances” standard.
• Police departments and federal courts (especially the Fifth Circuit): These institutions were directly impacted, as the ruling overturns a narrower, more protective standard for officers that had been in place.
  Second-Order Effects:
• For Policymakers: The decision creates a uniform standard across the country, which may lead to a review of use-of-force policies at the state and local levels. Legislators and police oversight boards may now push for policies that explicitly mandate de-escalation and a consideration of all preceding events, as the legal protection for officers is no longer limited to the precise moment a threat is perceived.
• For Researchers: This ruling opens new avenues for studying police encounters. Researchers can now more effectively analyze the full timeline of events—from initial contact to the use of force—to identify specific decision points and actions that escalate or de-escalate a situation. This provides a more robust data framework for evaluating officer training and behavior.
• For the Legal Profession: The decision makes it potentially easier to challenge police shootings in federal court. Civil rights attorneys and plaintiffs will have a stronger basis to argue that an officer’s actions leading up to a confrontation were unreasonable, thus expanding the scope of liability in excessive force lawsuits.
  Source:
• Barnes v. Felix, 604 U.S. _ (2025). The official opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court.

1. Launch of the 12 Million Calls Initiative
   Summary: The Policing Project at NYU Law, in partnership with several municipalities, launched the “12 Million Calls Initiative.” The program aims to divert 5% of the nation’s 911 calls to non-police alternative responders. This initiative builds on existing models and provides a framework for scaling non-police responses to incidents involving mental health crises, homelessness, and other non-violent issues.
   Key Players:

• The Policing Project at NYU Law: The driving force behind the initiative, providing research, guidance, and a model for implementation.
• Municipalities and Local Governments: The primary partners implementing the program.
• Non-Police Responders: The personnel, such as mental health professionals, social workers, and other community-based organizations, who are tasked with responding to the redirected calls.
  Second-Order Effects:
• For Startup Operators: This initiative signals a growing market for public safety technology that is not centered on law enforcement. Startups can focus on developing and offering dispatch software, data analysis tools, and communication platforms specifically designed for non-police responders. This creates a new, high-growth sector within the public safety space.
• For Policymakers: The program provides a scalable, evidence-based model for police reform that moves beyond simple budget reallocations. Municipal leaders can use this initiative to address public calls for alternative response models, potentially reducing the strain on police resources and improving outcomes for community members in crisis.
• For Investors: The shift toward alternative response models presents a clear investment opportunity. Venture capital can be directed to companies building the infrastructure for these new systems, from call routing and data management to training and personnel management for non-police teams.
  Source:
• “Announcing the 12 Million Calls Initiative.” The Policing Project at NYU Law, May 30, 2025.

1. Increased Adoption of AI for Non-Facial Recognition Surveillance
   Summary: Police departments and federal agencies have increasingly adopted new AI tools, such as the “Track” system, that bypass local and state bans on facial recognition. These technologies use artificial intelligence to identify individuals based on other physical attributes—like body size, clothing, and gait—rather than on their facial data. This development is happening at a time when many jurisdictions have either banned or heavily regulated facial recognition software.
   Key Players:

• Veritone (and similar technology companies): The developers and providers of AI-driven surveillance and analysis platforms.
• The Department of Justice, Homeland Security, and other federal and local law enforcement agencies: The primary adopters and users of these technologies.
• Policymakers and Civil Rights Organizations: The groups responsible for creating and challenging the regulatory frameworks around surveillance technology.
  Second-Order Effects:
• For Policymakers and Regulators: The rapid adoption of these new AI tools has created a new challenge for regulators. Jurisdictions that have banned facial recognition will now need to evaluate whether their existing laws are sufficient to govern these new forms of biometric surveillance. This could lead to a wave of new legislation aimed at regulating broader categories of AI-driven identification.
• For Investors: This trend highlights the continued, strong demand for surveillance and public safety technology. Investors can anticipate further growth in companies developing AI that circumvents existing regulations, but they should also be aware of the potential for future legal and regulatory challenges that could impact product viability.
• For Researchers: This development provides an urgent new area of study. Researchers in computer science, ethics, and law will need to analyze the accuracy, bias, and privacy implications of these new non-facial biometric systems. The findings will be critical for informing future public policy and challenging potential civil rights violations.
  Source:
• “The Brief: Five Years After George Floyd, Report on Use of Force Regulation.” Stanford Law School, June 25, 2025. This report identifies the adoption of “Track” and other AI tools as a significant trend.