In the ever-evolving realm of law enforcement, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) technology stands at the forefront of policy discussions. As governments at the federal, state, and local levels navigate the complexities of policing, the need for comprehensive oversight has become increasingly evident. With nearly 18,000 state and local law enforcement agencies in the U.S., the landscape of policing remains diverse and fragmented, requiring thoughtful legislative approaches to balance the advantages of AI with potential privacy and ethical concerns.
### The Current State of Law Enforcement
Most police departments operate under local governance, typically led by a chief who reports to a city mayor or police commission. Meanwhile, sheriffs are often elected at the county level, holding accountability to voters while managing budgetary oversight from county officials. State police agencies exist in every state, varying significantly in size—from North Dakota’s 139 officers to California’s sizable force of 7,202. Federal agencies, numbering around 90, employ a total of approximately 136,815 full-time officers, primarily focused on criminal investigation.
As law enforcement agencies explore AI adoption, policymakers are increasingly tasked with drafting legislation that mitigates risks while harnessing technology’s potential. However, no state or locality has established a comprehensive legal framework for regulating AI in policing. Where legislation has been implemented, states often opt to limit AI’s application or set specific use guidelines.
### Legislative Actions on Artificial Intelligence
State legislators across at least 30 states have examined over 150 bills related to the government’s utilization of AI in 2024. These proposals span issues such as inventories tracking AI use, impact assessments, AI usage guidelines, procurement standards, and the establishment of oversight bodies. These legislative efforts target both general governmental and specifically law enforcement applications, highlighting the urgent need for regulations governing AI’s role in policing.
#### Regulation of Facial Recognition Technology
Facial recognition technology (FRT) has emerged as a focal point in discussions regarding AI in law enforcement. Over the past five years, 18 states have contemplated laws to regulate FRT’s application within policing. Washington state, in 2020, was a pioneer in this regard, enacting legislation that mandates accountability reports, data management protocols, and security measures for government agencies utilizing FRT.
Two notable bills, Washington’s 2020 S 6280 and Colorado’s 2022 S 113, require law enforcement agencies to secure a warrant for ongoing surveillance or real-time identification via facial recognition. Utah has seen similar legislative action, limiting FRT usage to law enforcement under strict conditions. Moreover, several states have imposed outright moratoriums or restrictions on FRT applications in body cameras and aerial drones, such as California and Oregon.
As public skepticism of FRT grows, it has become increasingly clear that law enforcement agencies cannot solely rely on facial recognition outcomes for arrests or probable cause. Legislation in Alabama and Maryland, for example, stipulates that corroborating evidence must accompany facial recognition results for them to be deemed valid in a criminal context. This development illustrates a trend toward prioritizing due process and civil liberties.
### Advancements in Drone Technology
Drones equipped with AI capabilities represent another area undergoing meticulous scrutiny in law enforcement. At least 15 states have enacted requirements for law enforcement to obtain warrants before deploying drones. Legislation in states like Florida and Tennessee has expanded the permissible use of drones in evaluating crime scene evidence and emergency assessments.
However, lawmakers remain vigilant about potential cybersecurity risks associated with drone technology. Regulations introduced in states like Florida stipulate that law enforcement agencies can only acquire drones from approved manufacturers, ensuring quality and security control. Tennessee has similarly placed restrictions on the purchase of potentially risky equipment by state agencies, emphasizing public safety.
### Addressing Automated License Plate Readers
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) have also garnered legislative attention, with 18 states enacting laws to regulate their use and data retention practices. These devices enhance law enforcement’s investigative capabilities but raise concerns regarding privacy and potential misuse of data. For instance, laws in Georgia mandate that plate data must be destroyed within 30 months, balancing law enforcement requirements with privacy rights.
### Federal Actions and Insights
Despite limited legislative movement within the 118th Congress, federal bodies, including the Biden administration, have engaged with key issues surrounding AI and law enforcement. Legislative proposals such as HR 8005 and HR 6143 exemplify bipartisan efforts to regulate AI applications in criminal justice, particularly concerning child exploitation and drone technology.
In October 2023, President Biden signed Executive Order 14110, which calls for stricter analyses and reports on AI use within federal law enforcement. This directive includes provisions aimed at preventing discrimination linked to algorithmic decision-making, ensuring the protection of civil liberties and rights in AI applications.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has also shed light on the issue, providing testimony on the actual deployment of facial recognition technology across several federal agencies, including the Customs and Border Protection and the FBI, reflecting the significant role of AI in contemporary policing.
### The Road Ahead
As the intersection of technology and policing continues to develop, the overarching challenge remains clear: how to instill effective governance that respects civil liberties while leveraging technological advancements to enhance public safety. As state legislatures and federal agencies grapple with these issues, public engagement and transparency will be essential in shaping a policing landscape that is both effective and equitable.
With advocacy for responsible AI integration gaining momentum, it’s vital for communities to engage in discussions around these developments. This ongoing dialogue will ensure that the deployment of AI in law enforcement reflects society’s core values—transparency, accountability, and respect for individual rights—propelling us toward a future where technology serves the public good.
