ACLU Fights Racial Bias In Law Enforcement’s Facial Recognition

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is intensifying its efforts to combat the use of facial recognition technology (FRT) by law enforcement in California, Maryland, and Minnesota.

This move comes amidst growing concerns over racial bias and wrongful arrests, particularly among Black communities.

Facial Recognition: A Threat to Civil Liberties?

In recent years, facial recognition technology has been embraced by police departments across the United States, described as a powerful tool for identifying suspects. 

However, the technology has also come under fire due to its potential for racial bias and misuse. 

Of the seven documented cases where individuals were wrongfully arrested based on facial recognition errors, six involved Black individuals. 

The ACLU argues that these incidents are not isolated and reflect broader systemic issues within the technology’s application.

In Maryland, the ACLU has urged state police to adopt stricter policies around FRT use. 

Their recommendations include prohibiting arrests based solely on FRT matches and banning the use of FRT for video surveillance. 

The Maryland chapter of the ACLU also warns against the use of databases with non-consensually collected faceprints, such as those created by companies like Clearview AI.

Minnesota’s Mall of America and Surveillance Concerns

In Minnesota, the deployment of facial recognition at the Mall of America (MOA) has raised alarms among privacy advocates. 

The MOA, which attracts 40 million visitors annually, uses FRT in partnership with local law enforcement to identify “Persons of Interest.” 

The ACLU has criticized this move, highlighting the lack of transparency and the potential for mass surveillance. 

They argue that even with high accuracy rates claimed by FRT providers, the technology is unreliable in real-world scenarios, particularly for people of color.

California’s Stand Against Facial Recognition

Meanwhile, in California, legislators have consistently rejected the use of FRT by law enforcement. 

The recent defeat of Assembly Bill 1814, which would have allowed FRT use across the state, marks the third such rejection in five years. 

The ACLU of California has been vocal in its opposition, arguing that even with additional evidence, FRT is too flawed and biased to be a reliable tool for law enforcement. 

They contend that Californians have made it clear: they do not support government-sanctioned surveillance through facial recognition.

Feature Image Credit: ACLU