San Francisco bans cops’ use of facial recognition

San Francisco, long at the heart of the technology revolution, took a stand against potential abuse on Tuesday by banning the use of facial recognition software by the police and other agencies.
The action, which came in an 8-1 vote by the board of supervisors, makes San Francisco the first major American city to block a tool that many police forces are turning to in the search for both small-time criminal suspects and perpetrators of mass carnage.
Authorities used the technology to help identify the suspect in the mass shooting at an Annapolis, Maryland, newspaper last June. But civil liberties groups have expressed unease about the technology’s potential abuse by government amid fears that it may shove the United States in the direction of an overly oppressive surveillance state.
Aaron Peskin, the city supervisor who sponsored the bill, said that it sent a particularly strong message to the nation, coming from a city transformed by tech. But critics said that rather than focusing on bans, the city should find ways to craft regulations that acknowledge the usefulness of face recognition. “It is ridiculous to deny the value of this technology in securing airports and border installations,” said Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law expert. There will be an obligatory second vote next week, but it is seen as a formality.
Similar bans are under consideration in Oakland, California, and in Somerville, Massachusetts, outside of Boston.
The facial recognition fight in San Francisco is largely theoretical — the police department does not currently deploy such technology, and it is only in use at the international airport and ports that are under federal jurisdiction and are not impacted by the legislation.
The ban prohibits city agencies from using facial recognition, or information gleaned from external systems that use the technology. The San Francisco Police Officers Association said the ban would hinder their members’ efforts to investigate crime. “Although we understand that it’s not a 100% accurate technology yet, it’s still evolving,” said its president Tony Montoya.