The town of Brookline overwhelmingly voted to ban government use of facial recognition technology in the city on Wednesday, December 11th . The growing movement to prohibit the use of facial recognition at the state and local levels could hinder the operation of a growing national facial recognition network.
Brookline Town Meeting member Amy Hummel introduced a by-law (Article 25) banning all government use of facial recognition technology.
Face surveillance technology poses unprecedented threats to civil liberties. This warrant article gives Brookline Town Meeting the opportunity to take action and protect fundamental rights … Without a ban on facial recognition, the technology is likely to become entrenched without meaningful public knowledge or input, and it will become increasingly difficult to legislate and regulate the longer it is unfettered.
The town voted 179-8 to approve the ban.
Brookline became the second Massachusetts city to ban facial recognition. Earlier this year, Somerville passed an ordinance prohibiting the technology. The city of Springfield is considering a similar ban. There are also bills moving through the Massachusetts state legislature to place a moratorium on facial recognition technology.
The ACLU of Massachusetts is aggressively pushing measures to limit government use of facial recognition and supported the Brookline ban. In a statement, ACLU of Massachusetts Technology for Liberty Program director Kade Crockford called it a matter of basic civil liberties.
People should be able to walk around Brookline without worrying that government agencies are keeping tabs on their every movement. For too long, face surveillance technology has gone unregulated, posing a serious threat to our basic civil rights and civil liberties. In the absence of state or national action, municipal governments have taken the first steps towards sensible policy. We are grateful for Brookline’s leadership to bring this technology under democratic control.
The Brookline facial recognition ban is part of a broader nationwide movement to limit this invasive surveillance technology at the local and state level. San Francisco, Oakland, and Berkeley. have all prohibited government use of facial recognition technology. Portland, Oregon is considering similar bans, 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. The New York Assembly is considering a bill to ban facial recognition in schools and on police body cameras.
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.
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom
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 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.
Michael Maharrey [send him email] is the Communications Director for the Tenth Amendment Center, where this article first appeared. He proudly resides in the original home of the Principles of ’98 – Kentucky. ee his blog archive here and his article archive here. He is the author of the book, Our Last Hope: Rediscovering the Lost Path to Liberty. You can visit his personal website at MichaelMaharrey.com and like him on Facebook HERE
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.