• by Wendy Davis  @wendyndavis, November 22, 2024

Siding against Target, a federal judge has ruled that consumers can proceed with claims that the retailer violated an Illinois biometric privacy law by allegedly using facial recognition technology to combat shoplifting.

In a ruling issued Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge Jeremy Daniel in the Northern District of Illinois found that the consumers' allegations, if proven true, could support claims that Target ran afoul of the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act. That law includes a prohibition on collecting or storing scans of people's facial geometry without their consent.

Target denies that it uses facial recognition technology.

The decision comes in a class-action suit brought earlier this year by four Illinois residents -- Denise Arnold, Blaire Brown, Sandre Wilson and Lindsay Schumm. They alleged that Target uses “security cameras and video surveillance technology with facial recognition capabilities” in retail locations in Illinois.

Their complaint cited news articles regarding Target, including an April 18, 2018 CBS news report regarding Target's anti-shoplifting initiatives.

Schumm specifically alleged that she was shopping at Target on July 27 of this year when she received a notification that a Target “Asset Protection Operations Manager” had viewed her LinkedIn profile soon after she entered the store.

“These facts plausibly support Target’s use of facial recognition technology to recognize and identify Ms. Schumm,” the complaint alleged.

Target disputed the allegations and urged the consumers' attorney to drop the case.

“Target does not use video surveillance cameras that collect biometric data,” the company said in a June 2024 letter to class counsel. “While Target (like many retailers) does use video cameras to monitor its stores, Target’s system collects neither facial geometry nor any other category of biometric data.”

The company also said that none of the news articles cited in the complaint specifically mentioned facial recognition technology.

Target also urged Daniel to throw out the lawsuit, arguing that the consumers hadn't backed up their claims that the store uses facial recognition technology.

Daniel rejected that request for now.

“The plaintiffs are not required to establish that Target is using the technology at this early stage of litigation,” he wrote.

He added that the allegations -- including not only the news articles, but also Schumm's assertion that a Target employee viewed her LinkedIn page after she entered the store -- “make it plausible that Target is using facial recognition-enabled video surveillance technology.”

“Time will tell whether factual contentions such as this one have evidentiary support or ... will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery,” he wrote.