FACIAL RECOGNITION IN COURTHOUSES?

Our Take

Attorney Stephanie raises a question that deserves way more attention than it gets: if a courthouse — a place you may be legally compelled to appear — demands facial recognition just to walk in the door, what happens when you say no? That's not a hypothetical for a growing number of counties rolling out biometric checkpoints under the banner of "security." Credit to her for putting the legal framing in plain language, because most people never think about this until they're standing at the metal detector being told to look at a camera.

This is the same mission creep we track with ALPRs. First it's cameras scanning your plate as you drive to a doctor's appointment or a protest. Now it's cameras scanning your face before you can access the judicial system itself — a system you're often ordered to appear in, with no real alternative. The courts are supposed to be the place where citizens can check government power, not another checkpoint where you surrender biometric data just to exercise that right. If refusing entry means refusing due process, that's not consent, it's coercion.

Flock and similar networks are normalizing exactly this kind of "show us your identity or else" infrastructure nationwide, and courthouses are a logical next target for biometric expansion. If you want to see how far plate and camera surveillance has already spread near you, check our camera map, and if you're ready to push back on local deployments, our take-action page has concrete steps.