Purpose and Scope

This bill would prohibit Minnesota state and local government entities from using facial recognition technology. It aims to protect privacy by banning the acquisition, retention, access, or use of face surveillance and by preventing government contracts or arrangements with private companies to obtain or use such technology. It also creates consequences and remedies for violations.

Key Definitions

• face surveillance: an automated or semi-automated process that helps identify a person or gather information about a person based on the physical features of their face.
• face surveillance system: software or an application that performs face surveillance.
• government entity: a state or local government unit or law enforcement agency.
• government official: a person acting on behalf of a government entity.

Prohibited Activities (Main Provisions)

• Ban on use: A government entity or government official may not obtain, retain, access, or use a face surveillance system or information obtained from such a system.
• Prohibition on agreements: Government entities may not enter into agreements or arrangements with private entities to obtain, retain, access, or use face surveillance systems or related data.

Enforcement and Remedies

• Evidence and data handling: Any data collected or derived from facial recognition in violation of the bill, and any evidence derived from that data, may not be received in evidence in trials, hearings, or other official proceedings. Such data must be deleted when discovered.
• Legal actions for injury: The bill allows lawsuits for injunctive relief, declaratory relief, or writs of mandate against the relevant government entities to enforce compliance. If needed to achieve compliance, other government entities with the data may also be involved.
• Damages: Individuals subjected to face recognition in violation of the bill—or whose information was obtained, retained, accessed, or used in violation—may sue to recover actual damages, with the option of liquidated damages of at least $1,000 or $100 for each violation, whichever is greater.
• Prevailing party costs: Courts must award costs and reasonable attorney fees to the plaintiff who prevails.
• Sanctions for officials: Violations by a government official can be addressed through retraining, suspension, or termination, in line with due process protections.

Significance and Potential Impact

• This bill would replace or limit government access to facial recognition data and related systems, strengthen privacy protections, and create formal paths for individuals to challenge violations and obtain damages.
• It introduces specific penalties for both government entities and officials, including financial damages and employment-related discipline.
• The enforcement framework emphasizes deletion of unlawfully obtained data and restricts the use of such data in legal proceedings.

Practical Implications

• Government agencies would need to audit their technologies and contracts to ensure no face surveillance tools are in use or being obtained.
• Any ongoing arrangements with private firms for face surveillance would be halted.
• Affected individuals could pursue legal remedies and damages if their privacy rights are violated.

Relevant Terms - face surveillance - face surveillance system - government entity - government official - face recognition - obtain - retain - access - use - agreement - arrangement - private entity - unlawfully obtained - deleted upon discovery - injury - injunctive relief - declaratory relief - writ of mandate - actual damages - liquidated damages - costs - attorney fees - retraining - suspension - termination - due process - public safety - privacy protection