Comment by lukan 13 hours ago
May I ask, why there is such a focus on face scanning apps in the first place?
Aren't fingerprints way more easy to match correctly? Or is it about checking the faces with social media databases etc to see where the person is coming from?
> Finger prints require physical contact, facial recognition can be done at a distance and dragnet style
I'm sure there are lots of existing (pesky) laws about grabbing people and force-taking their fingerprint, or similar, while maybe not so many of those laws against taking a quick picture of a "suspects" face.
Broadly speaking, you don't have a right to privacy having your photo taken in the US. Is this a fourth amendment violation? I don't know. What is the difference between a face scan and a photo? More detail and accuracy is going to require close range facial depth mapping via infrared, versus facial recognition using photos or live video feeds.
They have faces for every US passport and for every/many[1] REAL ID drivers license. They only have fingerprints for some people that have been arrested and aliens that were admitted into the country.
[1] I'm not sure if REAL ID means the feds get access to driving license details or if there's just a lot of states that share this data voluntarily.
Sometimes CBP will take your fingerprint even for US citizens that enter the country. They did it to me (forcefully) even though I appeared with valid US passport.
It's my understanding they don't need a warrant for biometrics upon entering the country.
I think you are right that fingerprints are much easier to read and compare. I do believe it is for matching against images from social media, driver’s license, passports etc.
The government likely has pictures of many more people than they have fingerprints of.
Cynically, I imagine that a more difficult and less accurate system is desirable insofar as it can launder criminal behavior as computer error and absolve the perpetrator of whatever kidnapping / assault charges they might otherwise face.
Ostensibly, if ICE are acting within the scope of their duties, there are limits to the ways in which they can be charged with violations of state laws. An baroque system of identification allows them to claim they were acting in that scope.
In this way, it is perhaps similar to the widespread acceptance of drug-sniffing dogs which are no better than a coin flip (see Florida v. Harris, for example), and which can be trained to signal whether drugs are present or not.
Correct, they're not trying to be accurate. They're using methods that they know to be inaccurate against minorities to get probable cause enough to arrest and deport them. If there's an issue, if they are wrong, if they violate someone's civil liberties so what? The point is deport them by any means necessary, because when they're gone they can't fight back. The Supreme Court said racial profiling is okay as long as it's done with some other factors. They are telegraphing as long as there is some amount of "process" even if it's theatre, racially profiling is fine as far as SCOTUS is concerned.
Finger prints require physical contact, facial recognition can be done at a distance and dragnet style. Think Flock Group/Safety ALPRs (automated license plate recognition), but by face instead of license plates.