A face recognition system is an analytical technology intended at identifying or verifying a particular individual by their facial traits using an image, video, or in real-time mode. Currently, facial recognition is applied in different places, including police departments, airlines, retailers, and schools for many tasks, from controlling student attendance to determining criminal suspects.
Simultaneously, the technology causes significant concern in scholar, public, and political communities regarding the accuracy, privacy, and implicit bias. Thus, this paper aims at examining the bills regarding facial recognition technology, passed in different states and cities, and developing a possible statute that can be adopted by the Texas Legislature.
State Statutes
Facial recognition technology has come into widespread use by law enforcement officers at local, state, and federal legislation. Nevertheless, because of the issues related to civil rights and liberties, a dozen states have offered or even enacted some form of restriction to facial recognition technology used by law enforcement agencies. For instance, Oakland, San Francisco, California, and Massachusetts have already prohibited the utilization of facial recognition technology by city agencies. Moreover, recently, The Wall Street Journal informed about the adoption of a resolute restriction by the Portland City Council on the commercial use of facial recognition technology, which is strictest in the US, some experts state (Uberti, 2020). In addition to cities, some state governments, including California, New Hampshire, and Oregon, have their bills that ban the use of facial recognition by law enforcement in body cameras.
California
California has become one of the first states that limited facial recognition technology applications, joining Oregon and New Hampshire. In October 2019, its government enacted Assembly Bill No. 1215 (AB 1215) implying a 3-year moratorium on facial recognition and other biometric surveillance systemsusede in police body cameras, which took effect in January 2020 (“Law enforcement,” 2019). Nevertheless, the bill does not prohibit applying the technology on other cameras, and thus, law enforcement agencies can utilize the software during the performance of official duties in California. It is worth noting that AB 1215 empowers an individual to file a claim for declaratory and impartial defense against a law enforcement officer or agency who disturbs the prohibition.
New Hampshire
The formation of legislative regulation on facial recognition use in New Hampshire was complicated and accompanied by fierce debates both in the public and politics. Nonetheless, in December 2019, New Hampshire lawmakers managed to introduce House Bill 1642-FN (HB 1642), the last amendment of which was made on 19 February 2020 (“Prohibiting the state,” 2019). Through this act, the Senate and House of Representatives forbid the state officials from obtaining, retaining, or using the data from a face surveillance technology. However, the act allows lawful assistance of a New Hampshire state law enforcement agency for a federal agency by using the system. In addition, the state law official and enforcement agency cannot suggest, request, encourage, provide access to information from the facial recognition equipment out of the state.
San Francisco
San Francisco was the first major city in the US, ban the use of facial recognition systems by the government and enforcement agencies, including the police department. On May 14, 2019, the legislators voted for the ordinance 190110 named “Administrative Code – Acquisition of Surveillance Technology” and enacted May 31, 2019 (“Administrative Code,” 2019). In addition to the prohibition, the law indicates that only city administrators are authorized to approve the plans to buy and use the surveillance technology. Besides, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors appoints the controller as City Services Auditor, whose role is to audit the lawful use of services or equipment related to the surveillance system and report to the Board.
Portland
The Portland City Council has adopted one of the toughest municipal prohibitions on facial recognition technology in the United States, banning private and government use of the system within the city. The new legislation was passed unanimously on 9 September 2020 and established via two ordinances (Becker, 2020). The first law bans the public use of face recognition technology, giving gives 90 days for all the city bureaus to perform assessments concerning their application of facial recognition (Becker, 2020). At the same time, the second ordinance is directed at ceasing the use of the system by private organizations in public places and will go into effect from 1 January 2021 (Becker, 2020). Specifically, places such as restaurants, hotels, educational institutions, movie theaters, barbershops, among others, will be barred from using facial recognition technology. As exceptions, the bill allows using facial recognition for the verification for unlocking smartphones or protection of privacy provided by city agencies in the case of the spread of images outside the city.
The Proposed Statute in Texas
Biometric technology can be a beneficial tool both in the public and private spheres. In the first case, surveillance technology helps identify criminals, control border security, fight against terrorism, and prevent identity fraud. In the second case, biometrics assists in verifying employee information and worked hours, making advertisements more productive, and improving security by monitoring access to sensitive places. Nevertheless, facial recognition software has been revealed to possess insignificant race, age, and ethnic biases, resulting in the issues associated with civil rights violations and erroneous identification of persons by law enforcement. For example, in their study, Bacchini and Lorusso (2019) concluded that face recognition technology, in those forms implemented in Western countries, promotes present racial disparities and discrimination. Moreover, besides threatening privacy, the face recognition system linked to the large-scale database is vulnerable to data misuse, breaches, mission shift.
Considering the advantages and disadvantages mentioned above, biometric surveillance technology should be allowed but restricted to the extent enabling ensuring protecting the privacy and confidentiality of the state citizens. In particular, the government should prohibit facial recognition technology used in police body cameras since it can lead to racial tension due to people’s misidentifications, especially among the black population. In addition, Texas legislators should ban state officials from accessing, obtaining, or using the information from face surveillance technology. Finally, to prevent information leaks, the state law official and enforcement agency should be forbidden to suggest, encourage, provide access to information from the facial recognition system outside the state. However, state law enforcement agencies should provide support for state officials using facial recognition in cases provided by law.
Conclusion
In summary, the paper has examined the bills regarding facial recognition technology, passed in different states, including New Hampshire and California, and cities such as San Francisco and Portland. Specifically, California enacted Assembly Bill No. 1215 banning facial recognition systems use in police body cameras, while New Hampshire introduced House Bill 1642-FN forbidding the state officials from obtaining data from face surveillance technology. The government of San Francisco banned the use of the facial recognition system by the government and enforcement agencies, including the police department, whereas Portland adopted one of the toughest municipal prohibitions on facial recognition technology. Additionally, the paper has developed a possible statute that can be adopted by the Texas Legislature in 2021.
References
Administrative Code – Acquisition of Surveillance Technology, File No. 190110 (2019). Web.
Bacchini, F., & Lorusso, L. (2019). Race, again: How face recognition technology reinforces racial discrimination. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 17(3), 321-335. Web.
Becker, T. (2020). City Council approves ordinances banning use of face recognition technologies by city of Portland bureaus and by private entities in public spaces. Portland.gov. Web.
Law enforcement: Facial recognition and other biometric surveillance, Assembly Bill No. 1215. (2019). Web.
Prohibiting the state or a state official from using a face recognition system, New Hampshire House Bill 1642 (2019). Web.
Uberti, D. (2020). Portland passes strongest facial-recognition restriction in U.S. The Wall Street Journal. Web.