In 2022, police arrested Alonzo Sawyer because face recognition technology matched him as the suspect for a crime he simply did not commit.[1] The Baltimore County Police Department held Sawyer in custody for nine days and eventually arrested another man who was “seven inches taller and 20 years older” than Sawyer.[2] In 2022 alone, Baltimore officers ran over 800 facial recognitions that did not result “in more meaningful arrests.”[3] This was a horrible mistake that cost Sawyer his freedom.[4] Yet, Baltimore City took the first step in righting this wrong in 2021 when it banned private actors and government contractors from “obtaining, retaining, or accessing” facial recognition technology.[5]  However, Mayor Scott allowed this moratorium to expire without taking additional action.[6]

The Mayor of Baltimore City, Brandon Scott, has allowed the city to begin using “virtual stop and frisk” technology after prohibiting it back in 2021.[7] Facial recognition technology has been used across the country and in Baltimore to develop investigative leads for law enforcement.[8] While many praise this technology and treat it as a helpful investigative tool, others are concerned about its implication on the privacy of citizens, including members of the Maryland Legislature who have rallied for its permanent ban.[9]

Opponents of the use of facial recognition technology argue that its use is a violation of citizens’ fourth amendment protection against an unlawful search as well as a civil rights violation.[10] In Baltimore, the technology has been so wide sweeping that anyone who walks around is subject to its reach, whether they know it or not.[11] While the technology sounds like a great step into the future of policing, is not one-hundred percent accurate, confusing people within races, gender identities, and ages.[12] Meaning, the technology has the ability to misidentify wholly innocent people.[13]

To protect the public from unwarranted intrusion and liberty, Senator George Snydor proposed Senate Bill 192 which would govern the role this type of technology can play in criminal justice proceedings.[14] Specifically, the Bill proposes that “results generated by facial recognition technology may not serve as the sole basis to establish probable cause or identification of an individual in a criminal investigation or procedure.”[15] Rather, the technology may only be used in criminal proceedings as secondary evidence if probable cause was established by evidence wholly independent of facial recognition technology.[16] If passed, the Bill will become effective on October 1, 2023.[17]

This Bill, if enacted, will be a great first step in reducing the growing number of concerns with the use of facial recognition technology. This Senate Bill will help protect the citizens privacy and would limit the officers to properly use the facial recognition technology when it is deemed necessary.

---

Brian Muller is a third-year day student at the University of Baltimore School of Law and a Second-Year Staff Editor for Law Forum. Brian graduated from the University of Maryland, College Park in 2020, majoring in criminal justice and criminology. Over the past year, Brian has been a law clerk for Azrael, Franz, Schwab, Lipowitz & Solter, LLC. Upon graduation, Brian will serve as a Judicial Law Clerk for the Honorable Judge Martin H. Schreiber in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City. He hopes to pursue a career in corporate law.

Read more: Iphone’s “Face ID” is More Accurate than Maryland’s Facial Recognition Software: Protecting Alonzo Sawyer and Other Marylander’s from a One-Size-Fits-All Virtual Stop and Frisk

[1] Tim Cushing, Facial Recognition Pitches in to Help Cops Arrest a Maryland Man for a Crime He Didn’t Commit, Techdirt (Mar. 3, 2023), https://www.techdirt.com/2023/03/03/facial-recognition-pitches-in-to-help-cops-arrest-a-maryland-man-for-a-crime-he-didnt-commit/.

[2] Id.

[3] Id.

[4] Id.

[5] James Andrew Lewis & William Crumpler, Facial Recognition Technology: Responsible Use Principles and the Legislative Landscape, Ctr. for Strategic and Intl. Sec. (Sept. 29, 2021), https://www.csis.org/analysis/facial-recognition-technology-responsible-use-principles-and-legislative-landscape.

[6] Id.

[7] J. Brian Charles, Baltimore Could See More Surveillance as Facial Recognition Technology Moratorium Ends, Balt. Beat (Jan. 10, 2023), https://baltimorebeat.com/baltimore-could-see-more-surveillance-as-facial-recognition-technology-moratorium-ends/.

[8] Id.; Kristin Finklea, et al., Federal Law Enforcement Use of Facial Recognition, Cong. Rsch. Serv. (Oct. 27, 2020), https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R46586.pdf.

[9] Charles, supra note 6; S. 192, 2023 Gen. Assemb., 445th Sess. (Md. 2023).

[10] Face Recognition Policy Development Template, Bureau of Just. U.S. Dep’t. of Homeland Sec. (Dec. 2017), https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/Publications/Face-Recognition-Policy-Development-Template-508-compliant.pdf.

[11] Id.

[12] Id.

[13] Id.

[14] S. 192, 2023 Gen. Assemb., 445th Sess. (Md. 2023) https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/sb0192?ys=2023RS.

[15] Id.

[16] Id.

[17] Id.