Legislation1w ago
42
To authorize implementation grants to community-based nonprofits to operate one-stop reentry centers.
HR8548Rep. Kamlager-Dove, Sydney [D-CA-37] (D-CA)
introduced
HR4695119th CongressWALLET
Facial Recognition Act of 2025
Sponsored By: Representative Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-36]
Introduced
Summary
This bill would impose strict limits on law enforcement use of facial recognition and build layered oversight through testing, audits, and reporting. It focuses on narrowing searches, protecting civil liberties, and forcing transparency about accuracy and bias.
Show full summary
- Law enforcement agencies would be limited to searches of reference photo databases and court-ordered searches, with narrow emergency use that requires a court order within 12 hours; governments that fail to comply could face a 15% cut to certain grant awards the next year.
- People identified or subject to attempted identification would get detailed notice about the search, probe images, accuracy reports, and could sue for violations with damages up to the greater of profits from the violation or $50,000 per violation; evidence obtained in violation could be suppressed.
- Agencies and vendors would face annual benchmark and operational testing submitted to the National Institute of Standards and Technology with $5.0 million authorized per year for FY2026–FY2029; failures found in audits would trigger suspension until fixed and require public reporting.
Your PRIA Score
Score Hidden
Personalized for You
How does this bill affect your finances?
Sign up for a PRIA Policy Scan to see your personalized alignment score for this bill and every other piece of legislation we track. We analyze your financial profile against policy provisions to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
6 provisions identified: 6 benefits, 0 costs, 0 mixed.
Right to sue and agency penalties
If enacted, anyone harmed by unlawful facial recognition could sue the officer or agency. Courts could award the greater of profits from the violation or $50,000 per violation, plus punitive damages and attorney’s fees when appropriate. You would have two years from when you reasonably discover the violation to file, and good-faith reliance on a warrant or similar authorization would be a complete defense. States could be sued despite sovereign immunity. Courts would suppress illegally obtained face-recognition evidence, and agencies would have to start discipline proceedings for serious violations. States and localities that do not comply would face a 15% cut to certain federal justice grants in the next year.
Bans on surveillance and unproven matches
If enacted, officers could not use facial recognition to track protests or target people by race, religion, gender, or similar traits unless trustworthy, local, time-specific facts link a person to a crime. Use for immigration enforcement would be barred. Images from body cams, dash cams, or drones could not be used. A face match could not be the only reason for probable cause, and illegally obtained data or face surveillance would be banned.
Court orders before police face scans
If enacted, police would usually need a court order to search faces in a photo database. Agency leaders would have to approve the request before filing it. Orders would last no more than 7 days and limit which photos or video can be used. Narrow emergencies would allow quick use, but prosecutors must seek a court order within 12 hours or delete the data.
More transparency, audits, and photo cleanup
If enacted, agencies would have to post a public facial recognition policy within 90 days. They would remove certain arrest photos starting 180 days after enactment and every six months after (minors, no-charge releases, dropped cases, acquittals). If facial recognition was used to identify someone who is arrested, the person would get the court order, probe images, candidate list, accuracy or bias reports, and other records, in a suitable language. Federal, state, and local use would be logged and audited each year; violations would require agencies to stop using the tech until fixed. A public report would be published each June.
Tighter DMV photo access and notices
If enacted, states could not give bulk driver photos to law enforcement or vendors for facial recognition. DMVs could run or share searches only with a court order under this bill and only if state law clearly allows it. Each DMV would have to post clear notices in offices and online about how searches work. Notices and translations would be provided in Spanish and other common local languages when needed.
Yearly accuracy tests for police face tech
If enacted, law enforcement facial recognition systems would need yearly accuracy and bias tests. New systems would need independent tests before use, and an independent party would run annual operational tests. The Justice Department would set a high accuracy standard, including limits on differences across race, ethnicity, gender, and age. These rules would start 18 months after enactment. NIST would get $5 million each year for 2026–2029 to build tests and training standards.
Free Policy Watch
You just read the policy. Now see what it costs you.
Pick a topic. PRIA runs your household against live legislation and sends you a free personalized readout.
Pick a topic to get started
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-36]
CA • D
Cosponsors
Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-9]
NY • D
Sponsored 7/23/2025
Rep. Gomez, Jimmy [D-CA-34]
CA • D
Sponsored 7/23/2025
Rep. Ivey, Glenn [D-MD-4]
MD • D
Sponsored 7/23/2025
Rep. Veasey, Marc A. [D-TX-33]
TX • D
Sponsored 7/23/2025
Rep. Smith, Adam [D-WA-9]
WA • D
Sponsored 3/16/2026
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.govTake It Personal
Get Your Personalized Policy View
Take the PRIA Score to see how policy affects your household, then upgrade to PRIA Full Coverage for year-round monitoring.
Already have an account? Sign in