New Orleans debates real-time facial recognition legislation

New Orleans has emerged as a flashpoint in debates over real-time facial recognition technology. The city’s leaders are weighing a landmark ordinance that, if passed, would make New Orleans the first U.S. city to formally legalize continuous facial surveillance by police officers.

The move follows revelations that, for two years, the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) quietly used automated alerts from a privately operated camera network known as Project NOLA that bypassed the strictures of the city’s 2022 ordinance which explicitly banned such practices. Project NOLA is a non-profit surveillance network founded by ex-police detective Bryan Lagarde.

In May, The Washington Post published a damning exposé revealing that NOPD relied on over 200 facial-recognition-capable cameras connected to Project NOLA From early 2023 until this April, these cameras scanned public spaces, including high-traffic tourist areas like the French Quarter, sending instant alerts to officers’ mobile devices whenever a face matched someone on a watchlist of individuals of interest

At least 34 arrests are known to have followed these alerts, though precise figures remain undisclosed by authorities. Notably, none of these actions were reported to the City Council, nor did they appear in the quarterly compliance filings required under New Orleans’s ordinance.

The controversy stems from a 2022 ordinance passed in the aftermath of the Black Lives Matter protests which famously restricted facial recognition to post-incident investigation in violent crimes, using still images forwarded to the Louisiana State Analytical and Fusion Exchange (LA-SAFE) fusion center. Real-time surveillance and automated alerts were unequivocally prohibited. This ordinance also mandated dual-review processes for any facial recognition search, quarterly reporting to the City Council, and evidence protocols that disallowed arrests based solely on facial recognition matches.

Despite this, Project NOLA’s network was set to continuously and automatically scan public spaces. Every face that passed within view was compared in real time, and officers were pinged via an app whenever a watchlist match occurred, leaving no requirement for supervisory oversight, independent verification, or adherence to reporting standards.

After the Post’s report, NOPD Superintendent Anne Kirkpatrick acted decisively in April and suspended all automated alerts and commissioned a legal and procedural audit of the department’s use of facial recognition. In a public statement, she said she was unaware of the real-time alert system until the issue was uncovered and emphasized that surveillance of the citizenry without oversight was unacceptable

A federal audit conducted in 2023 which predated Project NOLA’s more aggressive integration reported that NOPD made 19 facial recognition requests, all of which were routed through LA-SAFE, resulting in only a single confirmed match. Investigators noted that NOPD had been discouraged from using the system due to slow processing times and low successful-match rates.

In response to the disclosure and the ensuing controversy, Councilmembers Oliver Thomas and Eugene Green drafted legislation to formally authorize “facial surveillance” and “characteristic tracking” for law enforcement purposes. If enacted, the new ordinance would permit NOPD and contracted partners to use real-time facial recognition to identify suspects, missing persons, or people under active investigation.

The proposal requires that participating entities such as Project NOLA report quarterly to the City Council on tools used, volume of scans, watchlists maintained, matches flagged, arrest outcomes, and accuracy metrics. The sponsors argue that formalizing these rules will increase transparency and accountability.

Proponents of the measure characterize it as necessary for public safety. They assert that New Orleans must equip its law enforcement agencies with advanced investigative tools to respond swiftly to violent crime. Advocates cite two recent high-profile incidents to underscore their case: a New Year’s Day massacre on Bourbon Street that killed 14 people, and the mass escape of ten inmates from Orleans Parish Justice Center in May, some of whom were later recaptured using facial recognition alerts.

Lagarde says Project NOLA’s network offers significantly higher quality video, capturing facial details up to 700 feet away, compared to the city-owned cameras limited to 720p or 1080p resolution effective only up to 25 feet. Business interests, including a group known as the NOLA Coalition, have supported expanding the legal use of the technology, citing national readiness and a desire to match the capabilities of federal agencies.

Surveys show considerable public support, with around 70 percent of New Orleans residents reportedly backing police use of facial recognition in investigations.

Opponents argue that automated surveillance everywhere in public spaces raises profound threats to privacy, civil rights, and due process. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Louisiana described the system as a “facial recognition technology nightmare” that enables the government to “track us as we go about our daily lives.”

The wrongful arrest of Randal Reid based on misidentification from still-image facial recognition is touted as highlighting the real-world dangers of facial recognition. Reid is a 29‑year‑old Black logistics analyst from Georgia who was wrongfully arrested in late 2022 and held for six days due to a false facial recognition match.

The ACLU stresses that with live, public scanning, the risks multiply, including misidentifications, false matches, arrests without judicial oversight, and ongoing surveillance without transparency. ACLU further said that the exemptions for protesters, undocumented immigrants, and people seeking abortions are “paper thin” loopholes that could be circumvented or eroded.

The ACLU has urged the City Council to reimpose a moratorium and demand an independent audit covering privacy compliance, algorithmic bias, evidence admissibility, record retention, and public awareness. The organization said that NOPD currently lacks any system for logging or disclosing facial-recognition-derived evidence, and Project NOLA operates outside official oversight entirely.

Without any federal law governing AI-based policing tools, New Orleans may be blazing a new trail with significant risk. Several states and cities, including California, Massachusetts, and Virginia, explicitly forbid live facial recognition surveillance by law enforcement. By contrast, New Orleans could become the first major U.S. city to not only allow, but formalize automated, real-time facial scanning in public spaces.

The combination of a private camera network with governmental policing powers raises complex questions about public transparency. Private operators such as Project NOLA aren’t subject to public records or open-data laws, despite their direct impact on policing.

A vote by the City Council is expected later this month. If passed, NOPD and any authorized third party will be legally empowered to scan live public feeds using facial recognition, provided reports are submitted according to the new law.

Meanwhile, NOPD is awaiting the outcome of its internal audit and Kirkpatrick has stated that policy revisions will be guided by the council’s decisions. Meanwhile, the ACLU and partners are preparing to escalate their opposition, pushing for either outright prohibition or deeply strengthened accountability measures.

The decision facing New Orleans encapsulates the broader tension between embracing AI-based public safety tools and protecting civil liberties. Proponents emphasize the edge that real-time intelligence can provide in stopping violent crime and responding to emergencies, while critics warn that indiscriminate surveillance erodes privacy, civil rights, and due-process safeguards.

Article Topics

biometric identification  |  biometrics  |  criminal ID  |  facial recognition  |  New Orleans  |  police  |  Project NOLA  |  real-time biometrics  |  United States