ShareThis Page
Nation

FBI wants to shroud biometrics database

| Wednesday, June 1, 2016, 8:09 p.m.

WASHINGTON — Civil liberties groups are criticizing an FBI proposal that they say would make it harder for people to know if personal information about them such as fingerprints and iris scans is on file.

The FBI is proposing to exempt a large identification database from certain provisions of the federal Privacy Act, a law that, among other things, lets individuals sue to see what information the government keeps on them.

That database, known as the Next Generation Identification system, contains a wealth of biometric data such as fingerprints, palm prints, photographs and iris scans. It holds photographs submitted by law enforcement agencies but also millions of fingerprints of Americans who have undergone background checks.

The proposed Privacy Act exemption is needed “to prevent interference with the FBI's mission to detect, deter and prosecute crimes and to protect the national security,” according to a Justice Department notice that appeared recently in the Federal Register. FBI and Justice Department officials noted this week that law enforcement agencies may claim exemptions for records “compiled for the purpose of identifying criminals and for conducting criminal investigations.”

They also said in a statement: “The Department of Justice and the FBI take very seriously their strict compliance with the Constitution, all federal laws including the Privacy Act, and their own policies regarding the free exercise of constitutional rights.”

The public has an opportunity to object to the proposed rule change.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me