(somber piano music) - [Narrator] In 2016, Memphis police officers were quietly using Facebook, along with more conventional techniques, to gather information related to a series of protests.

Some activists had a suspicion that they were being watched.

A local insider tipped off community organizer, Keedran Franklin, who had taken part in an early morning protest on the lawn of the mayor's private home.

- And they went on to tell me that there's this book, has y'all information, names, pictures, pictures on the wall, and I'm like, whoa.

- [Narrator] The following year, Franklin found himself on a city hall security watch list, along with dozens of other tenuously connected people.

Elaine Blanchard is a minister who took part in a racial justice protest.

She learned from a local reporter that she, too, was on the list.

- What's the deal?

What's going on?

And he said, oh have you not seen the news?

There's a list of people who can't go into city hall without a police escort, and your name is on it.

- Everybody I looked at who was on that list, I was like, what's the pattern here?

What's the pattern?

- [Narrator] To activist Paul Garner, it looked like critics of the police had been targeted.

The city said it was simply a safety precaution, but the question of who put the list together and where the names and information came from mattered in Memphis because of a court case almost 40 years earlier.

In the 60s and 70s, a domestic intelligence unit within the Memphis Police Department tracked citizens' political activities through undercover surveillance.

- They were very concerned about communist infiltration of the civil rights movement.

The labor movement, the civil rights movement, and later, the peace movement.

- [Narrator] In 1976, the ACLU took the city of Memphis to court, arguing that citizens' constitutional rights were under siege.

The result was the Kendrick consent decree which barred local police from gathering political intelligence, Veteran Memphis journalist, Otis Sanford, covered the case.

- This consent decree would prevent them from conducting and maintaining information on those groups and those individuals.

- [Narrator] Buddy Chapman was the new police director in 1976, he saw an opportunity to forge bonds of trust between the police and the community.

- We were coming to the end of law enforcement agencies at every level, being able to do things just totally in secret with no accountability.

- [Narrator] For decades, Memphis police appeared to comply with the terms of the consent decree, but recently, with the quickening pace of protest movements, police found new tools for keeping up with rapidly unfolding events.

- You know, we didn't have social media in 1978 when that consent decree was formed, so the way policing is done today, a lot of it is done through social media.

That's how protests start these days.

- [Narrator] Using a fake Facebook identity, a police sergeant friended his way through the Memphis activist community, noting names and connections, accessing closed groups, and raising suspicions.

- They were sharing it with businesses, St. Jude, FedEx, Shelby County school systems, AutoZone.

What do they need with my personal information?

- [Narrator] The surveillance was not just virtual.

Officers watched and photographed public and private events.

The ACLU said local police should not have been collecting that information, period.

It violated the consent decree, so the city went back to court.

Officials argued that the 1978 ruling was outdated.

Bruce Kramer sees it differently.

- And so the techniques have changed, but the concept of an unreasonable search and seizure hasn't.

The right to privacy hasn't changed.

It's how you apply today's technology to basic freedoms.

- [Narrator] In October 2018, a federal judge ruled that the Memphis Police Department had engaged in political intelligence as defined by the 1978 consent degree.

In the wake of that ruling, a committee of law enforcement and legal experts headed by former federal prosecutor Ed Stanton, are now advising the court, as it helps MPD work out rules that balance the privacy rights established by the consent decree with public safety.

- Anytime you're the first at something, obviously there's some challenges that come with it, that does not negate the fact that the city agreed to these terms.

- We are having to think a lot about not only what is the current state of the art of surveillance technology, right, what can police departments do?

What are they capable of?

And then how should the police department be able to use that information.

- [Narrator] Citing pending litigation, MPD declined to comment for this story.

The city has maintained that its techniques used to monitor protestors do not violate First Amendment rights, and are consistent with other departments nationally.

However, committee members are optimistic that the work being done now in Memphis could provide a clearer policy for other cities to follow.

- I can't think of another city that has paid this much attention to what a policy looks like.

- Wait, just a second.

- [Narrator] Still, activists remain skeptical of the real world impact the court case will have.

- If we think that police surveillance is over in Memphis, we're kidding ourselves.

- [Narrator] The work of the court, the monitor, and the city, continue mostly behind closed doors, and for now, the consent decree stands intact.

But technology and social media have the continuing potential to disrupt the balance between protest and public safety for activists and police alike.

(somber music)