Remote biometric identification seems to be an invasive and inappropriately used methodology. One which invades one's privacy.
Facial Recognition Technology aka Remote Biometric Identification
An article was published by the American Policy Center that was originally published by the Constitutional Alliance.
First, I would like to state the Constitutional Alliance's support of the brave men and women who protect and serve in law enforcement. Too often these people are demonized by the acts of a very very few people in law enforcement. There are somewhere around 50 million contacts between law enforcement and the public each year.
The Chilling Effect of Domestic Spying
The Chilling Effect of identifying people protesting is undeniable. People would not protest if they were in fear of retaliation by government as a result of being identified in public. Further, according to SCOTUS, law enforcement must have a reasonable suspicion of a criminal act taking place before asking a person for their identification.
There is an Expectation Not to be Identified
While there is no expectation of privacy in public, there is an expectation not to be identified, or protect our anonymity in public. In addition, simply because there is no law, does not mean a law should not exist.
Further, I encourage people to read the articles provided by doing a search of Georgetown Law and Facial Recognition Technology. Among the articles provided by the search there are numerous articles about the constitutionality of the use of Facial Recognition Technology and/or the need for laws about the use of RBI (Remote Biometric Identification.) The following is a link to such a search: Search Georgetown University of Law
Of note: our Executive Director, Steve Meyer, spoke before world thought leaders June 14-16 2011 at Georgetown University of Law, Washington D.C.; at an international Computers, Freedom & Privacy convention titled "the future is now" and sponsored by the high tech firms of the day.
© Copyright 2024 by Constitutional Alliance.