COMMENTARY

Facial recognition software isn't right for Detroit or Michigan, two state senators say

Peter Lucido and Stephanie Chang
In this Wednesday, Feb. 13, 2019, photo, Massachusetts Institute of Technology facial recognition researcher Joy Buolamwini stands for a portrait behind a mask at the school, in Cambridge, Mass. Buolamwini's research has uncovered racial and gender bias in facial analysis tools sold by companies such as Amazon that have a hard time recognizing certain faces, especially darker-skinned women. Buolamwini holds a white mask she had to use so that software could detect her face. (AP Photo/Steven Senne)

In Michigan and across the country, we find ourselves grappling with the question: How do we reconcile the circumstances in which facial recognition technology can, or should, be used by law enforcement?

The short answer is, it shouldn’t. Our communities have no need for such overreach, nor do Michigan residents deserve to be subjected to such intense observation and scrutiny. This is why we must pass Senate Bill 342 — to prohibit such technology from being used by Michigan law enforcement personnel in real-time.

State Sen. Peter J. Lucido

At its very core, the use of facial recognition as a form of identification is a violation of our basic liberties. It’s an invasion of privacy and violation of our right to due process. As researchers from Georgetown University who studied the technology’s use in cities like Detroit and Chicago succinctly concluded, “Most of us do not expect to be sharing our attendance at a church service, community meeting, or at an addiction treatment center with law enforcement.”

Yet, Detroit’s facial recognition technology is already here and could be used in connection with the cameras installed all over the city at gas stations and grocery stores, under the guise of Project Green Light, while overreaching into the lives and privacy of the very citizens it purports to shield and protect. 

Fundamentally, there is something inherently wrong with this type of approach to policing. Our law enforcement personnel have other available approaches with which to keep our cities safe without the need to utilize facial recognition technology. No one, except for our loved ones — not our police, politicians, or private security companies — should be concerned with having such unfettered access to our whereabouts every single time we leave the house.

State Sen. Stephanie Chang (D-Detroit)

When you really stop to think about it, it’s downright frightening to think about how these facial recognition cameras exist for two purposes: One, to monitor and record but, two, they are also giving law enforcement the ability to run scans of photo databases in real time to be able to identify who walked across the screen at any given moment.

More:Experts: Duggan's denial of facial recognition software hinges on 3 words

More:Detroiters concerned over facial recognition technology as police commissioners table vote

There are also very troubling accuracy issues with this invasive technology. How can we trust a software that correctly identifies black women only 66% of the time? Or that matches 28 members of Congress with mugshots? There has been recent movement in our state to acknowledge those who have been wrongfully convicted and growing knowledge that very serious mistakes have been made in our criminal justice system that resulted in innocent people being punished. With all these things being true, it simply does not make sense to use technology that has been proven to have so many errors.

Many of our vulnerable communities already struggle enough, and the use of facial recognition technology only stands to add to their troubles. In fact, our black cops in Detroit are even being profiled as criminals.

More:Controversial Detroit facial recognition program prompts public meeting

More:Delta to roll out facial recognition at Detroit Metro Airport

And, what happens if this technology fails and doesn’t keep our streets safe? One wrong match could keep a criminal out of jail or keep an innocent person behind bars.  

As Americans, we all have our rights to freedom of speech, freedom of association, and due process. If we allow law enforcement to implement facial recognition technology, we’re throwing away the very values we hold dear that make this country the land of the free.

Quite frankly, that’s not a risk we’re willing to take.

Sen. Peter Lucido, R–Shelby Township, is the sponsor of Senate Bill 342 and represents residents of Senate District 8 in Macomb County that includes Mt. Clemens, St. Clair Shores, Village of Grosse Pointe Shores, Bruce Twp., Chesterfield Twp., Harrison Twp., Lenox Twp., Ray Twp., Shelby Twp., Washington Twp., New Haven, and Romeo.

Sen. Stephanie Chang, D–Detroit, is a cosponsor of Senate Bill 342 and represents residents of Senate District 1 in Wayne County that includes the cities of Detroit, Ecorse, Gibraltar, River Rouge, Riverview, Trenton, Woodhaven, and Wyandotte, and the townships of Grosse Ile and Brownstown.