There are no federal laws governing police use of facial recognition technology in the United States. As of late 2025, 15 states have some form of restriction on police use, and 16+ cities have implemented bans. Cities have been the pioneers, San Francisco led in 2019, followed by Boston, Oakland, and others.
But here's what you need to know: every publicly known wrongful arrest due to facial recognition has been of a Black person. The technology's racial bias isn't theoretical, it's documented in court records, settlements, and ruined lives.
The Current Landscape
15
States with facial recognition restrictions [2]
0
Federal laws regulating police use [1]
16+
Cities with bans or restrictions [4]
100%
Of known wrongful arrests were Black individuals [3]
By 2025, nearly two dozen states had enacted or expanded restrictions on facial recognition. Many target law enforcement use; others focus on commercial applications. [5]
State-Level Restrictions
States vary dramatically in how they regulate facial recognition. Here's the breakdown: [2]
States with Multiple Strong Limits
These seven states have the most comprehensive restrictions on police use:
- Colorado - Testing/accuracy standards, notice requirements, "sole basis" prohibition
- Maryland - Serious crime limits, notice requirements, "sole basis" prohibition (2024)
- Maine - Serious crime limits, "sole basis" prohibition
- Montana - Warrant requirement, notice requirements, serious crime limits, "sole basis" prohibition
- Utah - Warrant requirement, serious crime limits
- Virginia - Testing/accuracy standards, "sole basis" prohibition
- Washington - Notice requirements, "sole basis" prohibition
States with Stronger Limits
These states have meaningful restrictions beyond body camera bans:
- Alabama - "Sole basis" prohibition
- Illinois - Serious crime limits (BIPA also restricts commercial use)
- Massachusetts - Restrictions on law enforcement use
- Minnesota - Restrictions on law enforcement use
- New Jersey - Notice requirements
- Vermont - Serious crime limits
Body Camera Bans Only
- New Hampshire - Bans facial recognition in combination with police body cameras
- Oregon - First state to do so (2017), though scope is narrow
Key State Requirements Explained
Warrant Requirements
Montana and Utah require police to obtain a warrant before using facial recognition in most situations. This is the strongest protection, treating biometric surveillance like other invasive searches. [2]
"Sole Basis" Prohibitions
Seven states prohibit facial recognition from being the sole basis for an arrest: Alabama, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Montana, Virginia, and Washington. [2]
This means police can't arrest someone based only on a facial recognition match, they need independent corroborating evidence.
Notice Requirements
Five states require notice when facial recognition is used: Colorado, Maryland, Montana, New Jersey, and Washington. [2]
This typically means defendants must be informed that facial recognition was used in their investigation, allowing them to challenge the evidence.
Serious Crime Limits
Six states limit facial recognition use to serious crimes: Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Montana, Utah, and Vermont. [2]
This prevents police from using the technology for minor offenses like shoplifting or traffic violations.
Testing and Accuracy Standards
Only two states, Colorado and Virginia, require testing and accuracy standards for facial recognition systems. [2]
Given the documented racial bias in these systems, this is a critical gap in most state laws.
City-Level Bans
Complete Municipal Bans
These cities have banned government use of facial recognition entirely:
- San Francisco, CA - First US city to ban (May 2019) [6]
- Oakland, CA - Followed San Francisco [4]
- Boston, MA - Second-largest municipality in the world to ban (June 2020) [7]
- New Orleans, LA - Banned in 2020, partially reversed in 2022 [8]
- Pittsburgh, PA [4]
- Santa Cruz, CA [4]
San Francisco: The Pioneer
San Francisco's 2019 ordinance went beyond just facial recognition: [6]
- Banned city department use of facial recognition
- Required departments to disclose all surveillance technologies they use or plan to use
- Mandated Board of Supervisors approval for surveillance policies
- Does not affect personal, business, or federal government use
But enforcement has been problematic. In the five years since the ban, police admitted to circumventing it six times, blaming two officers for most violations. [9]
The Workaround Problem
A 2024 Washington Post investigation found that police in Austin and San Francisco skirted their city bans by asking officers in other cities to run facial recognition for them. [10]
Boston anticipated this: their law prohibits police from using facial recognition tech and from asking another agency to use it on their behalf. [7]
Reversals
Not all bans have held:
- New Orleans (2022) - Changed its 2020 ordinance to allow facial recognition for violent crime investigations with supervisor permission [8]
- Virginia (2022) - Outlawed local police use in 2021, then approved limited use in 2022 [8]
The ban movement has slowed. Five municipal bans passed in 2021, but none in 2022 or 2023. [4]
The Wrongful Arrest Problem
Every publicly known case of wrongful arrest due to facial recognition has involved a Black person. [3]
Robert Williams - Detroit (2020)
In January 2020, Detroit police wrongfully arrested Robert Williams outside his home, in front of his two young daughters and wife, and detained him for 30 hours. [11]
This was the first publicly reported case of a false facial recognition match leading to wrongful arrest. [11]
In June 2024, a historic settlement was reached, the nation's strongest police department policies on facial recognition, including: [11]
- Police must have independent, reliable evidence linking a suspect to a crime before making any arrest
- Mandatory training on facial recognition dangers, especially for people of color
Randal Quran Reid - Louisiana/Georgia
Randal Quran Reid was driving to his mother's home outside Atlanta the day after Thanksgiving when police pulled him over. They told him the warrant was from Louisiana, a state he had never visited. [12]
He was jailed for nearly a week due to facial recognition misidentification. [12]
Nijeer Parks - New Jersey
Parks was wrongly jailed following a misidentification through Idemia facial recognition technology. His lawsuit partly blames his wrongful arrest on the "misuse of biased technology." [13]
Trevis Williams - NYPD (2025)
In August 2025, the NYPD falsely arrested Trevis Williams based on a wrongful facial recognition match. [14]
The Pattern
According to the ACLU, facial recognition technology is worse at identifying Black people, raising issues of racially disparate policing. [3]
In 2019 and 2020, three Black men were accused of, and jailed for, crimes they didn't commit after police used facial recognition to falsely identify them. [3]
States Considering New Laws
As of 2025, at least seven more states are considering facial recognition legislation: [5]
- Georgia
- Hawaii
- Kentucky
- Massachusetts (expanding existing law), H.1946 would ban police biometric surveillance entirely
- Minnesota (expanding existing law)
- New Hampshire (expanding existing law)
- West Virginia
Recent laws in Maryland and Virginia are serving as templates, taking a broad approach that regulates facial recognition across different contexts. [5]
What the Laws Don't Cover
Critical Gaps
Most state laws only restrict law enforcement use. They don't cover:
- Federal agencies (ICE, CBP, FBI)
- Private businesses
- Schools
- Landlords
- Private security
This means you can be tracked by facial recognition at a concert, in a store, at your apartment building, or at work, with no legal protection in most states.
The Illinois Exception: BIPA
Illinois's Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) is unique, it regulates commercial use of biometric data, not just police use. [2]
BIPA requires:
- Written consent before collecting biometric data
- Clear disclosure of collection purposes
- Data retention and destruction policies
BIPA has been used in major lawsuits against companies like Facebook (now Meta), which paid a $650 million settlement in 2021.
What You Can Do
Check Your State
Know what protections (if any) exist in your state. If you're in a state without restrictions, contact your state legislators.
Support Local Bans
City and county bans have proven effective, even if imperfect. Organizations like the ACLU and EFF track and support ban efforts.
Demand Notice Requirements
If facial recognition is used in your case (criminal or civil), you may have a right to know, depending on your state. Ask your attorney.
Document Everything
If you believe you've been wrongfully identified by facial recognition:
- Document your whereabouts at the time of the alleged offense
- Preserve any evidence (receipts, witnesses, GPS data)
- Contact civil rights organizations immediately
The Bottom Line
The US has no federal facial recognition law. States are filling the void with a patchwork of regulations, some strong, most weak.
Cities pioneered bans but enforcement has been inconsistent. Police in ban cities have asked other agencies to run searches for them.
And the racial bias in these systems isn't theoretical, it's documented in every wrongful arrest case.
Until federal legislation arrives (and there's no indication it will soon), protection depends entirely on where you live.
References
- NPR - With no federal facial recognition law, states rush to fill void
- TechPolicy.Press - Status of State Laws on Facial Recognition Surveillance
- ACLU - Williams v. City of Detroit
- Innovation & Tech Today - 13 Cities Where Police Are Banned From Using Facial Recognition Tech
- Virginia Mercury - Facial recognition in policing is getting state-by-state guardrails
- NPR - San Francisco Bans Use Of Facial Recognition Technology By Municipal Government
- ACLU - Boston Bans Face Recognition Surveillance
- CNN - First, they banned facial recognition. Now they're not so sure
- SF Standard - SF police repeatedly skirted facial-recognition ban, lawsuit says
- Washington Post - Police in Austin, San Francisco skirt facial recognition ban
- Michigan Law - Flawed Facial Recognition Technology Leads to Wrongful Arrest and Historic Settlement
- Gizmodo - Innocent Black Man Jailed After Facial Recognition Got It Wrong
- CBC - Facial recognition tech linked to Black man's wrongful arrest
- S.T.O.P. - Condemns NYPD False Facial Recognition Arrest