The Rhode Island state court system is piloting facial recognition technology to analyze security camera footage at courthouses, per a new Judiciary policy.
The technology analyzes security camera footage and notifies judicial security personnel if a person previously designated as a “monitored attendee” — determined by court security as someone to be “threatening, disruptive or suspicious” within the court — enters the courthouse, according to a March 13 court document that details the technology’s usage. The security official is then “authorized to monitor that individual’s movements throughout the judicial facility.”
According to the Judiciary document, “Judicial security personnel shall not consider an individual’s race, religion, gender, ethnicity, national origin or any other protected trait” when determining monitored attendee status.
But the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island has expressed concerns about the technology’s potential privacy risks through a letter sent by Steven Brown, executive director of the ACLU of Rhode Island, to the chief justice of the R.I. Supreme Court.
The general policy document states that access will be prohibited for “any third party, including law enforcement agencies,” but a separate document, revised on March 13, details additional policies governing the retention and dissemination processes involving video footage.
The additional document, obtained by The Herald, outlines the court’s policy regarding requests for stored video footage. The document states that, in the event of a request for footage, the Office of General Counsel will maintain a “general position of nondisclosure” but may provide footage to law enforcement agencies involved in active criminal investigations or in accordance with a subpoena.
Brown also referenced actions of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials in Providence, highlighting officers’ attempt to detain an individual inside a city courthouse in January.
“I think even if the courts set up all sorts of safeguards to prevent ICE from making use of the facial recognition software for any reason, there will still be an understandable fear among some members of the immigrant community about walking into the courthouse,” Brown said in an interview with The Herald.
ICE did not respond to The Herald’s request for comment.
Current courthouse policy requires law enforcement officers to “sign the designated logbook at each Courthouse security entrance” and “indicate the date, name, name of law enforcement agency, badge number, the purpose of the visit, entry time and departure time,” according to a document revised on March 13.
Another concern Brown raised was a “serious problem of false positives, particularly on people of color,” he said in an interview with The Herald.
Assistant Professor of Political Science Paul Testa, who is an expert on criminal justice but was not involved with the new policy, shared similar concerns in an interview with the Herald.
“Rather than making the courtrooms more safe, it will make people feel less safe entering these spaces,” he said, noting that some individuals may feel concerned about the possibility of their personal information “being used for immigration purposes.”
“We want a courtroom with equal access, where everyone has the right to a fair trial,” Testa added.
Brown said he believes the courts should have created “an opportunity for the public to weigh in on the policy” before implementation.
Testa also said that because the new system has implications for both “public safety” and “civil rights,” its implementation “merits a public discussion.”
“Having the opportunity for citizens to exercise voice and input is generally better policy, even if it takes a longer time,” he said. “I think it is worth doing the planning (and) listening in part because I think our legal system is predicated oftentimes on legitimacy and process.”
The Rhode Island Judiciary did not specifically comment on the claims about ICE, false positive concerns or public input.
