California’s statehouse is considering a controversial facial recognition bill


As protestors square off against police across the country, California is readying a bill that could expand the state’s use of facial recognition, including for law enforcement purposes.
Introduced as Assembly Bill 2261, the bill would provide a framework by which companies and government agencies could legally engage in facial recognition, provided they give prior notice.
The bill has been moving slowly through the state legislature since February and is being considered by the Assembly Appropriations Committee this week. For supporters, it’s an important privacy measure, heading off the more extreme uses of widely available technology. Ed Chau, the assemblyman who introduced the bill, called it “the long overdue solution to regulate the use of facial recognition technology by commercial, state and local public entities,” in an editorial for CalMatters on Tuesday.
But critics — including the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California — say the bill will only expand the use of the technology further. In particular, they allege that providing legal conditions under which the technology can be used undercuts outright bans that have been put in place by a number of California municipalities, including San Francisco, Oakland, and Berkeley.
Crucially, the local ACLU chapter says it’s too easy to scan a user’s face without their permission, with no consent required for government agencies and only minimal requirements for businesses. “The bill would invite the use of facial recognition to deny health care, housing, financial products, and basic necessities,” said Matt Cagle, attorney with the ACLU of Northern California, told The Verge. “All a company would have to do is keep a human in the loop (even if that human is an employee of the company). Instead of providing real protection to Californians, this bill will further endanger the Black and brown people most harmed by COVID-19 and police violence.”
Police use of facial recognition has been widely criticized by activists and researchers. A 2019 study from Georgetown’s Center on Privacy and Technology found that police often used commercial systems incorrectly, either by inputting fraudulent faces or obscured images to get the desired result.
Update 5:09PM ET: Updated with new quote from ACLU-NC representative.
As protestors square off against police across the country, California is readying a bill that could expand the state’s use of facial recognition, including for law enforcement purposes. Introduced as Assembly Bill 2261, the bill would provide a framework by which companies and government agencies could legally engage in facial…
Recent Posts
- The Oppo Find N5 has made me even more excited for the Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge – here’s why
- Apple Intelligence is coming to the Vision Pro
- Security flaw in popular stalkerware apps is exposing phone data of millions
- Anker’s 58-liter solar fridge is a noisy power-monster
- Salt Typhoon hackers used this clever technique to attack US networks
Archives
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- September 2018
- October 2017
- December 2011
- August 2010