Massachusetts lawmakers are considering new restrictions on the use of facial recognition technology by law enforcement, following a legislative hearing held Tuesday by the Joint Committee on the Judiciary. The hearing focused on two bills – H.1946 and S.1053 – that would implement reforms proposed by the state’s Special Commission on Government Use of Facial Recognition, formed under the 2020 police reform law.
State Police Control and Due Process Requirements
The proposed legislation would place control of all facial recognition searches under a specialized State Police unit, barring local police departments from direct access. Supporters, including the Attorney General’s Office, ACLU of Massachusetts, and the Committee for Public Counsel Services, say this centralization will help prevent misuse and reduce wrongful arrests, which have occurred in other states where oversight was lacking.
The bills also introduce due process protections by requiring a warrant for any facial recognition search conducted in connection with a felony investigation, except in emergencies. Law enforcement would be required to document and report all uses of the technology, establishing a clear paper trail and accountability measures. These reforms aim to address concerns raised since the passage of Massachusetts’s initial 2020 compromise legislation, which fell short of a near-ban due to opposition from then-Governor Charlie Baker.
Civil Rights Concerns and Broader Context
Facial recognition technology has come under increasing scrutiny due to its documented accuracy problems, especially when identifying people of color. Studies from the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and advocacy groups like the ACLU have found higher false positive rates for Black and female faces, contributing to a number of wrongful arrests across the country. These concerns echo criticisms voiced during Nashville’s rejection of a surveillance platform in December 2024 over fears it could enable biased facial recognition deployment.
The Massachusetts bills would also bring the state in line with jurisdictions that have adopted more robust oversight frameworks. In 2024, for example, Ann Arbor, Michigan enacted a local ordinance mandating a facial recognition policy that includes warrant requirements and usage transparency.
The Joint Committee on the Judiciary is currently reviewing the testimony presented during Tuesday’s session and will decide in the coming weeks whether to advance the proposed legislation.
Sources: CT Public, Progressive Massachusetts, Massachusetts Legislature
–
By the ID Tech Editorial Team
