FB pixel

U.S. courts at odds over Constitutional protection of biometric device locks

 

A pair of recent rulings in U.S. court on whether the compulsion of biometrics by law enforcement to access personal devices such as smartphones violates Fifth Amendment protections shows a judicial split on the subject, according to the New York Law Journal.

Early in 2019, Northern District of California Judge Kandis Westmore ruled that biometrics such as fingerprints and facial images for device unlocking are testimony, rather than physical evidence. Six months earlier in the nation’s capital, Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey ruled the opposite, but set out three conditions for the use of suspect biometrics to unlock a device.

Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson Partner Evan T. Barr writes that the judge in the latter case found the subject’s biometric features analogous to the key to a wall safe, more than to the numerical combination of a safe, and is thus permissible to compel. In security architecture terms, however, something you have and something you know are both considered distinct forms of information from something you are (such as biometrics).

“The Northern District of California probably has the better of the argument and its reasoning will likely be followed by more courts in the future,” Barr argues in the article’s conclusion. “Electronic devices have always included a password option. A biometric feature such as a fingerprint obviates the need to expend mental energy on a password but that is a meaningless distinction in the 21st century. From a functional standpoint, enabling a biometric feature is still a deliberate measure requiring a modicum of effort which is intended to accomplish the same purpose as a traditional passcode: protecting enormous quantities of private information from inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure.”

Barr notes that high-tech spoofs may enable law enforcement to unlock devices without forcing biometric input, and that the Stored Communications Act, search warrants and subpoenas provide the government with many tools with which to access personal electronic devices.

Article Topics

 |   |   |   |   |   | 

Latest Biometrics News

 

Biometrics developers dance with data privacy regulations continues

Biometrics controversy and investments are often found side by side, as seen in many of this week’s top stories on…

 

EU AI Act should revise its risk-based approach: Report

Another voice has joined the chorus criticizing the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act, this time arguing that important provisions of…

 

Swiss e-ID resists rushing trust infrastructure

Switzerland is debating on how to proceed with the technical implementation of its national digital identity as the 2026 deadline…

 

Former Jumio exec joins digital ID web 3.0 project

Move over Worldcoin, there’s a new kid on the block vying for the attention of the digital identity industry and…

 

DHS audit urges upgrade of biometric vetting for noncitizens and asylum seekers

A recent audit by the DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) has called for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)…

 

Researchers spotlight Russia’s opaque facial recognition surveillance system

In recent years, Russia has been attracting attention for its use of facial recognition surveillance to track down protestors, opposition…

Comments

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Most Read This Week

Featured Company

Biometrics Insight, Opinion

Digital ID In-Depth

Biometrics White Papers

Biometrics Events