Michigan Bill Would Place Total Ban on Police Use of Facial Recognition Technology

by | May 28, 2019

Michigan Bill Would Place Total Ban on Police Use of Facial Recognition Technology

by | May 28, 2019

LANSING, Mich. (May 28, 2019) – A bill introduced in the Michigan Senate would ban the law enforcement use of facial recognition technology in the state. The proposed law would not only help protect privacy in Michigan, but it would also hinder one aspect of the federal surveillance state.

Sen. Peter Lucido (R) introduced Senate Bill 342 (SB342) on May 22. The legislation would prohibit law enforcement officials from obtaining, accessing or using any facial recognition technology, along with any information gathered from such technology. Any information obtained in violation of the law would be inadmissible in court “as if the evidence, arrest warrant, or search warrant was obtained in violation of Amendment IV of the Constitution of the United States and section 11 of Article I of the state constitution of 1963.”

In effect, the passage of SB342 would impose a total ban on the use of facial recognition technology by Michigan law enforcement.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS

Federal, state and local law enforcement agencies are partnering to create a massive, nationwide facial recognition system. 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.

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.”

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.

In a nutshell, without state and local cooperation, the feds have a much more difficult time gathering information. Passage of SB342 would eliminate one avenue for gathering facial recognition data. Simply put, data that doesn’t exist cannot be entered into federal databases.

WHAT’S NEXT

SB342 was referred to the Senate Committee On Judiciary And Public Safety where it must pass by a majority vote before moving forward in the legislative process.

Republished from tenthamendmentcenter.com.

Our Books

Shop books published by the Libertarian Institute.

Libertarian Institute Merch from Libertas Bella

Support via Amazon Smile

Support The Libertarian Institute

We rely on the generosity of our donors to make all of this possible. Support The legendary Sheldon Richman, the firebrand Pete Quinones, the brilliant Kyle Anzalone and our great group of writers and podcasters.

About Michael Maharrey

Michael Maharrey [send him email] is the communications director for the Tenth Amendment Center. He also runs GodArchy.org, a site exploring the intersection of Christianity and politics. Michael is the author of the book, Constitution Owner's Manual: The Real Constitution the Politicians Don't Want You to Know About. You can visit his personal website at MichaelMaharrey.com, like him on Facebook HERE and follow him on Twitter @MMaharrey10th.

Our Books

6 Libooks011721lg

Related Articles

Related

How Supreme is the Supreme Court?

How Supreme is the Supreme Court?

One intriguing aspect of the Covid lockdowns has been the shift in power from an oligarchy whose edicts were often taken to be the supreme law of the land to an empire where a single person now dictates with the same absolute authority. From the nine black-robed...

read more
Scott Horton Busts Neocon Conspiracies in New Book

Scott Horton Busts Neocon Conspiracies in New Book

Last month Foreign Affairs ran an article saying that Iran and Israel were engaged in mutual hostilities that could drag the United States into a war not of our choosing, and there was no mention in the article of the people who really do want the U.S. to go to war...

read more
Moral Rhetoric vs. Reality

Moral Rhetoric vs. Reality

Philosophers tend to divide normative theories of morality into two broad categories: deontological and teleological. Deontological theories prioritize right action over good outcomes. If an action is wrong, then it is intrinsically wrong, regardless of the...

read more
Correcting the Lapdog Media

Correcting the Lapdog Media

Former CNN White House correspondent Michelle Kosinski declared on Twitter last week that American journalists would “never expect…Your own govt to lie to you, repeatedly” and “Your own govt to hide information the public has a right to know.” Kosinski denounced...

read more
Israel Vows Further Escalation in Bombing of Gaza

Israel Vows Further Escalation in Bombing of Gaza

Israel continued its bombardment of the besieged Gaza Strip through Tuesday and into Wednesday morning as the death toll continues to mount. Gaza’s health ministry said early Wednesday that so far, at least 35 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli airstrikes,...

read more

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This