Facial Recognition Fiasco: The Case for Transparency in Criminal Justice
In a tech twist, we’re battling for transparency in face recognition technology (FRT) use in courtrooms. Our amicus brief insists both the accused and public need access to how FRT works. After all, if the tech is making errors, someone might be misidentified as the world’s worst criminal—a mime!
Hot Take:
Move over, black boxes! The courtroom is no place for secretive tech with more biases than a reality TV judge. The EFF is all about making sure that face recognition technology (FRT) isn’t just a high-tech guessing game that could land innocent people in the slammer. Transparency is the name of the game, and they’re not backing down until the law takes off the blindfolds and lets justice see the light of day!
Key Points:
- EFF filed an amicus brief for transparency in FRT used in criminal cases.
- In the case of State of New Jersey v. Arteaga, courts ruled FRT details must be disclosed.
- The ruling intends to uphold defendants’ rights to scrutinize evidence and build a defense.
- FRT has a history of inaccuracies, especially affecting marginalized groups.
- Public access to FRT details is argued to bolster judicial oversight and confidence.
Already a member? Log in here