The State Bar responded to a demand that it stop using Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) with a request for more information as to how people of color are disadvantaged when completing the bar exam.
"The State Bar looks forward to responding to your concerns about facial recognition technology,” wrote State Bar of California Assistant General Counsel James J. Chang in his Feb. 16 letter. “Your letter, however, discusses this technology in only the most general terms and in other inapplicable contexts. It does not set forth how you believe the State Bar’s limited use of facial recognition for identity verification results in an unlawful disparate impact on examinees of color and women examinees.”
Chang was responding to a letter sent by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law on Feb. 10 to the State Bar of California, demanding that it switch to an alternative because darker-skinned law students taking the bar exam reported being unrecognized by FRT.
“Please provide us with this analysis so that we may satisfactorily respond to your concerns,” Chang stated.
As previously reported in the Southern California Record, a number of people of color allegedly experienced headaches after having to shine a bright light on their faces for the entire two-day exam and that they were terrified of being misidentified as cheating.
“We are considering a formal response to the letter, but the State Bar does not need us to tell them about the adverse impact FRT has on examinees of color,” said Noah Baron, an attorney with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “They have known since before the October exam.”
Baron added that many groups wrote to the State Bar discussing this matter in depth setting forth the specific ways in which the use of FRT on the bar exam poses challenges for examinees of color.
“We know the State Bar is aware of the many articles reporting on the problems which examinees of color have faced as a result of the use of FRT on the bar exam,” Baron told the Southern California Record. “Even if that were not so, the State Bar has access to the data about how FRT has impacted law school students of color. It should review that data and make the data public immediately.”
Alternatives to FRT, according to Baron, include an open book format, diploma privilege, and emergency temporary practice however Chang asked for more information on how they would work to verify the identity of examinees.
“It is unclear how an open book format would completely eliminate the need for facial recognition unless identity verification is not conducted,” Chang stated. “Please advise so that we may provide you with a meaningful response.”