Since at least the 1980s, police departments in the United States have embraced a set of practices that aim, not to enable the prosecution of past criminal activity, but to discourage (or even prevent) people from breaking the law in the first place. It is not clear that these practices effectively lower the crime rate. However, whatever its effect on the crime rate, I argue that preventive policing is essentially distinct from legal governance, and that excessive reliance on preventive policing undermines legal governance. To show this, I emphasize law’s unique aptitude to define legal subjects’ ‘manifest’ status relations – that is, the rights and obligations that live within their local practices. I then argue, first, that preventive policing does not aim to define these relationships; and second, that excessive preventive policing threatens the relationship that law must bear with its subjects if law is to define their manifest relations authoritatively.

中文翻译：

---

反对管理国家：作为非法律治理的预防性警务

至少从 1980 年代以来，美国的警察部门已经采取了一系列做法，其目的不是为了起诉过去的犯罪活动，而是首先阻止（甚至阻止）人们违法。目前尚不清楚这些做法是否有效地降低了犯罪率。然而，无论其对犯罪率的影响如何，我认为预防性警务与法律治理本质上是不同的，过度依赖预防性警务会破坏法律治理。为了表明这一点，我强调了法律在定义法律主体“显化”地位关系方面的独特能力——即存在于他们当地实践中的权利和义务。然后我认为，首先，预防性警务的目的不是定义这些关系；其次，