Washington State House Members Debate Privacy as Questions Remain
Questions remain about potential private right of action and facial recognition provisions in Washington state’s privacy legislation (see 1903220057). During executive session Tuesday, the House Innovation, Technology and Economic Development Committee extended the discussion through Wednesday because the latest House language wasn't publicly posted until Tuesday. Chairman Zack Hudgins (D) cited the need for openness and transparency.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The latest House language would dictate that privacy law enforcement mirror the state’s Consumer Protection Act, which includes the private right of action. The Senate version excludes private right of action, meaning only the attorney general could act against offenders. Hudgins asked Tuesday for clarity on existing law. Ranking member Norma Smith (R) noted the state’s net neutrality bill is similar to the Senate version in that it doesn’t allow a private right of action. Microsoft and Internet Association oppose the private right of action.
Civil rights advocates and law enforcement remain concerned about facial recognition language, Smith said. She wants clarity on how the technology can be used and how privacy harm is defined. She aired concerns about broad exemptions allowing data brokers to potentially create unintended consequences for consumers.
The latest House language is “far from perfect,” Hudgins said. Lawmakers are exploring changes concerning the Children’s Protection Act, healthcare authority and loss prevention in the retail and healthcare sectors, he said.
Committee staff member Yelena Baker outlined keys differences between the Senate-passed bill and House language. The Senate bill would take effect in July 2021, while House language sets implementation for July 2020.
House language would dictate data controllers aren't allowed to use facial recognition technology for profit or to make decisions that produce legal effects for consumers. The Senate bill would allow such use if there’s meaningful human review of the material before final decision-making. Rep. Vandana Slatter (D) asked for clarity on what’s meant by human review.
The most recent House language would require agencies obtain warrants for targeting individuals with facial recognition surveillance in a specified limited time frame. The Senate bill would allow ongoing surveillance of individuals in public places based on court orders. The Senate version would mandate companies meet certain thresholds to be subjected to the law, a provision not included in House language.