On May 31, 2024, Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed HB 1130 into law. This legislation amends the Colorado Privacy Act to add specific requirements for the processing of an individual’s biometric data. This law does not have a private right of action.Continue Reading Colorado Privacy Act Amended To Include Biometric Data Provisions
Biometrics
Bill Restricting Companies’ Use of Biometrics and Expanding California’s Right To Know Nationwide Introduced in Senate
Senators Jeff Merkley (D-Merkley) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) recently introduced the National Biometric Information Privacy Act (NBIPA), which would require private entities to obtain consumers’ and employees’ written consent prior to collecting their biometric information and expand nationwide individuals’ access rights and rights to request additional information from businesses. The bill also would grant a private right of action. Unlike other proposals that focus on regulating the use and funding of biometric surveillance technology by government entities, the NBIPA regulates private entities’ use of biometrics.
Continue Reading Bill Restricting Companies’ Use of Biometrics and Expanding California’s Right To Know Nationwide Introduced in Senate
Florida Legislature Proposes State Biometric Information Privacy Act
The regular session of the Florida Legislature began on March 5, 2019. Over the course of the 60 day session, the Legislature will consider a number of bills on a variety of topics. Among the measures that will be considered are two bills that address biometric information privacy: one from House Representative Bobby DuBose (D) (HB1153) and one from Senator Gary Farmer, Jr. (D) (SB 1270).
Continue Reading Florida Legislature Proposes State Biometric Information Privacy Act
Illinois Supreme Court Decides Actual Harm Not Required to Bring Claim Under BIPA
On January 25, 2019, the Illinois Supreme Court published its widely anticipated decision in Rosenbach v. Six Flags Entertainment Corporation et al., addressing the question of what it means to be an “aggrieved” person under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, 740 ILCS 14/1 et seq. (“BIPA”). Under BIPA, aggrieved persons are entitled to seek liquidated damages and injunctive relief. In a unanimous decision authored by Chief Judge Karmeier, the court held that individuals seeking relief under BIPA “need not allege some actual injury or adverse effect” to be considered aggrieved persons.
Continue Reading Illinois Supreme Court Decides Actual Harm Not Required to Bring Claim Under BIPA
Illinois Supreme Court to Decide Statutory Standing Requirements Under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act
On November 20, 2018, the Illinois Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Rosenbach v. Six Flags Entertainment Corporation et al., a case arising under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, 740 ILCS 14/1 et seq. (“BIPA”). BIPA provides a private right of action for persons “aggrieved by a violation of [the] Act.” The crux of the issue presented to the Illinois Supreme Court is the meaning of “aggrieved by” under BIPA–in other words, what harm is sufficient to satisfy statutory standing requirements underlying BIPA’s private right of action?
Continue Reading Illinois Supreme Court to Decide Statutory Standing Requirements Under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act