For those of us concerned about privacy, the future is becoming a dangerous place. It has been slightly more than one year since the NSA fiasco. Many people in this country were shocked at the degree to which the federal government monitors ours phone calls and texts. At a local level, rapidly advancing surveillance technology is becoming increasingly available to police departments. Civilian aircraft and drones can be equipped with high resolution cameras, maintaining a vigilant, constant eye from above. And in some cities, police are gathering data on their citizens like never before. Facial recognition cameras can identify you by scanning your face. These are feasible law enforcement techniques that are only becoming more practical and more available. As it advances, so does the threat of government intrusion into our privacy.
Los Angeles: a City Watching from the Sky
In 2012, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department had a civilian aircraft to fly over the city of Compton and collect high-resolution video of all activity within the 10-square mile area of the city. This is according to the story in the Atlantic titled “Eyes Over Compton.” The County could zoom in, follow cars, and track people. The video also allowed them to rewind so they could go back and see anything they were not watching live. This technology, created by Persistence Surveillance Systems, is being marketed to police departments around the nation. Currently, the civilian aircraft can stay in flight for up to 6 hours. The citizens of Compton were not told that they were being watched.
The L.A. County sergeant who defended the operation justified it on the basis that the cameras are not yet capable of identifying individual faces. But it is ridiculous to suggest that this hurdle won’t be cleared very soon.
The Troubling Implications of Facial Recognition
Proponents imagine a world in which you can conveniently look into a screen and are instantly recognized. You’ll never need to carry a driver’s license or enter passwords. But, according to this recent New York Times article, some industry insiders are cautioning about the massive, looming privacy concerns implicated by this technology.
In some parts of the country, officers are already employing mobile devices to collect images in the field. According to this article from eff.org, the San Diego, CA police department collects face images in the field. The growing database—which services over 20 federal, state and local agencies—and has already amassed a database of over 1.4 million images. Worse, the images are not just collected from suspects in custody, but are being gathered from public security cameras and even social media. People with whom police have had no contact whatsoever are going into the database.
Technology and the Fourth Amendment
This is hardly the first time that technological innovation has been at odds with our privacy, and the Supreme Court has not always kept pace. Consider the first wire tap case in 1928, Olmstead v. United States. In Olmstead, the court held that wiretaps were not an intrusion unless there was a physical trespass. This is a terrible holding, but it took almost 40 years for the court to reverse this and rule that a warrant is always required—regardless of physical trespass onto property—if a reasonable expectation of privacy had been breached. The question will be: to what degree does a person have the right to informational privacy while in public? The Court has not directly addressed this issue, although it may have to this summer. Two cases dealing with cell phones searches will come down in June, but this issue will continue to trouble both courts and cities for years to come.
