On September 16, 2020

Attorney general aims to stop facial recognition company from collecting, selling images of Vermonters

Attorney General T.J. Donovan has prevailed against a motion to dismiss filed by Clearview AI in the lawsuit to stop the facial recognition company from collecting and selling images of Vermonters. The Court’s ruling means the case, which was filed in April, may now move forward.

In its motion, Clearview failed to persuade the Court that it has a First Amendment right to engage in its facial recognition surveillance practices and “near absolute immunity” from suit under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.  Clearview also argued that the state’s claims were void for vagueness under the Constitution and that the state lacked standing to bring the suit. The Court rejected all of these arguments.

“We are pleased with the Court’s ruling and will continue litigating this case to protect Vermonters’ privacy rights,” said Attorney General Donovan. “Clearview’s practices are disturbing and offend public policy.”

The Court noted that the First Amendment does not protect deceptive statements including those allegedly made by Clearview about Vermonters being able to remove themselves from the database. The Court also denied Clearview’s argument that the First Amendment protected other allegedly unfair conduct, such having bad data security, because it was “non-expressive speech” and therefore not protected by the First Amendment.

The Court also held that Clearview is not protected by Section 230 of the CDA, a law which shields platforms like Twitter and Facebook from liability for what others post there. This case involves allegations about how photographs are collected through screen scraping and applied facial recognition, not their redistribution.

Lastly, the Court found that the state had adequately alleged that Clearview’s actions offend public policy, and are immoral, unethical, oppressive or unscrupulous – factors that support an unfairness claim under the Consumer Protection Act.  It also held that exposing Vermonters to unwanted surveillance and marketing its product to law enforcement would be likely to cause substantial injury to Vermonters.

Do you want to submit feedback to the editor?

Send Us An Email!

Related Posts

Vt Legislature advances bill to ban toxic ‘forever chemicals’ from firefighting gear, dental floss, cleaning products

June 4, 2025
The Vermont Senate and House advance legislation (H.238) May 29 that would outlaw the use of toxic perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in firefighting gear, dental floss, cleaning products, and fluorine-treated containers—a critical step in reducing Vermonters’ exposure to these harmful substances. The Senate expanded the bill as passed by the House by adding a provision that…

To be continued…

June 4, 2025
A final compromise on education reform proved elusive late Friday, and at about 11 p.m., the Senate adjourned, followed by the House at about 11:30 p.m. As late as 10 p.m., legislative leaders were still hopeful that the six conferees (three House and three Senate members) could reach a deal sometime before midnight that would…

Nearing the end?

June 4, 2025
After passing several challenging bills in the last few weeks, the Vermont Legislature adjourned until June 16 due to an impasse over negotiations on our education transformation bill, H.454. Many other bills addressing housing, homelessness, healthcare, and several other major issues required compromises from both the House and the Senate in order to be passed…

Vermont gets $23 million from ongoing settlement with tobacco manufacturers

June 4, 2025
Attorney General Charity Clark announced last month that Vermont received a total of $23,132,483.92 from tobacco manufacturers under the tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA). Annually, Vermont receives monies from tobacco manufacturers from the MSA, which resolved the state’s lawsuit filed in the 1990s. The settlement funds are credited to the state’s Tobacco Fund, and the…