Government prohibition on using facial recognition technology rejected by judiciary committee

New technologies of any sort are double-edged swords, with both upsides and downsides. Cell phones are great conveniences but can be deadly when they cause distracted driving.

Facial recognition technologies fit that pattern. On the plus side, they can help law enforcement investigate and solve crimes, but they can have a sinister, Big Brother side, too, that can invade our privacy.

That dichotomy took center stage at the House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee Tuesday when members failed to approve HF3661 along party lines. The bill would prohibit government entities in Minnesota from using facial recognition technology.

Sponsored by Rep. Aisha Gomez (DFL-Mpls), the bill would ban a state or local government entity — on its own or through an arrangement with a private entity — from using a facial surveillance system or using information obtained from such a system.

Rep. Sandra Feist (DFL-New Brighton), who presented the bill on behalf of Gomez, said the technology has “serious privacy ramifications” regarding anonymity in public. “It’s akin to wearing a blown-up copy of your driver’s license on the outside of your shirt in public with a GPS tracking device attached.”

Civil rights advocates support the bill.

Chad Marlow, senior policy counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union, said facial recognition technology “suffers from significant accuracy issues.”

This inaccuracy is more common when scanning and analyzing the faces of persons of color, women, young people and senior citizens, he said, leading to many instances of unjustified stops or arrests of people in these categories.

Law enforcement agency representatives testified against the bill.

Maj. Spencer Bakke of the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office said the public benefits of facial recognition technology is “extremely substantial … and can and should be used in accordance with lawful constitutional investigations.”

“An outright ban,” he added, “deprives the public and victims of the benefits of this technology.”

He stressed that his office has established strict policies governing the use of the technology that, in his opinion, addresses privacy concerns. Among its regulations, facial recognition technologies cannot be used for definitive identifications on suspects, thereby requiring such identifications to be corroborated through other means.

Even if the technology leads to an investigative lead, Bakke said the policy prohibits it from being used as probable cause for arrest.