Tenth Amendment Center: New York Bill Would Ban Police Use of Facial Recognition Technology
ALBANY, N.Y. (Jan. 29, 2020) – A bill introduced in the New York Senate would ban police use of facial recognition and other biometric surveillance technologies. The proposed law would not only help protect privacy in New York; it would also hinder one aspect of the federal surveillance state.
Sen. Brad Hoylman (D-Manhattan) introduced Senate Bill 7572 (S7572) on Jan. 27. The legislation would ban state and local police in New York from acquiring, possessing, accessing, installing, activating or using any biometric surveillance system, or any biometric information or surveillance information derived from the use of a biometric surveillance system by any other entity. Under the proposed law, biometric surveillance systems include facial recognition technology, along with automated systems that can identify an individual through their voice, gait, retina scans and other biological data.
The bill would not restrict the use of other existing lawful practices involving the use of biometric information by law enforcement, such as the state’s DNA index or fingerprints used in the state identification bureau.
“Facial recognition technology threatens to end every New Yorker’s ability to walk down the street anonymously,” Hoylman said in a press release announcing the bill. “In the wrong hands, this technology presents a chilling threat to our privacy and civil liberties – especially when evidence shows this technology is less accurate when used on people of color, and transgender, non-binary and non-conforming people. New York must take action to regulate this increasingly pervasive and dangerously powerful technology, before it’s too late.”
The New York Assembly is also considering a bill to ban facial recognition in schools and on police body cameras.
This legislation is part of a broader nationwide movement to limit this invasive surveillance technology at the local and state level. San Francisco, Oakland, and Berkeley, California have all prohibited government use of facial recognition technology, along with Somerville, Northhampton, Cambridge and Brookline, Massachusetts. Portland, Oregon is considering a similar ban. The California governor recently signed a bill that imposes a 3-year ban on the use of the tech in conjunction with police body-worn cameras, leading to the shutdown of one of the biggest facial recognition programs in the country.
IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS
A recent report revealed that the federal government has turned state drivers’ license photos into a giant facial recognition database, putting virtually every driver in America in a perpetual electronic police lineup. The revelations generated widespread outrage, but this story isn’t new. The federal government has been developing a massive, nationwide facial recognition system for years.
The FBI rolled out a nationwide facial-recognition program in the fall of 2014, with the goal of building a giant biometric database with pictures provided by the states and corporate friends.
In 2016, the Center on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law released “The Perpetual Lineup,” a massive report on law enforcement use of facial recognition technology in the U.S. You can read the complete report at perpetuallineup.org. The organization conducted a year-long investigation and collected more than 15,000 pages of documents through more than 100 public records requests. The report paints a disturbing picture of intense cooperation between the federal government, and state and local law enforcement to develop a massive facial recognition database.
“Face recognition is a powerful technology that requires strict oversight. But those controls, by and large, don’t exist today,” report co-author Clare Garvie said. “With only a few exceptions, there are no laws governing police use of the technology, no standards ensuring its accuracy, and no systems checking for bias. It’s a wild west.”
There are many technical and legal problems with facial recognition, including significant concerns about the accuracy of the technology, particularly when reading the facial features of minority populations. During a test run by the ACLU of Northern California, facial recognition misidentified 26 members of the California legislature as people in a database of arrest photos.
With facial recognition technology, police and other government officials have the capability to track individuals in real-time. These systems allow law enforcement agents to use video cameras and continually scan everybody who walks by. According to the report, several major police departments have expressed an interest in this type of real-time tracking. Documents revealed agencies in at least five major cities, including Los Angeles, either claimed to run real-time face recognition off of street cameras, bought technology with the capability, or expressed written interest in buying it.
In all likelihood, the federal government heavily involves itself in helping state and local agencies obtain this technology. The feds provide grant money to local law enforcement agencies for a vast array of surveillance gear, including ALPRs, stingray devices and drones. The federal government essentially encourages and funds a giant nationwide surveillance net and then taps into the information via fusion centers and the Information Sharing Environment (ISE).
Fusion centers were sold as a tool to combat terrorism, but that is not how they are being used. The ACLU pointed to a bipartisan congressional report to demonstrate the true nature of government fusion centers: “They haven’t contributed anything meaningful to counterterrorism efforts. Instead, they have largely served as police surveillance and information sharing nodes for law enforcement efforts targeting the frequent subjects of police attention: Black and brown people, immigrants, dissidents, and the poor.”
Fusion centers operate within the broader ISE. According to its website, the ISE “provides analysts, operators, and investigators with information needed to enhance national security. These analysts, operators, and investigators…have mission needs to collaborate and share information with each other and with private sector partners and our foreign allies.” In other words, ISE serves as a conduit for the sharing of information gathered without a warrant. Known ISE partners include the Office of Director of National Intelligence which oversees 17 federal agencies and organizations, including the NSA. ISE utilizes these partnerships to collect and share data on the millions of unwitting people they track.
Reports that the Berkeley Police Department in cooperation with a federal fusion center deployed cameras equipped to surveil a “free speech” rally and Antifa counterprotests provided the first solid link between the federal government and local authorities in facial recognition surveillance.
In a nutshell, without state and local cooperation, the feds have a much more difficult time gathering information. Passage of state laws and local ordinances banning facial recognition eliminates one avenue for gathering facial recognition data. Simply put, data that doesn’t exist cannot be entered into federal databases.
WHAT’S NEXT
S7572 was referred to the Senate Finance Committee where it must pass by a majority vote before moving forward in the legislative process.
Mike Maharrey
January 29, 2020 at 05:25AM
