Insights On Article III Standing Under Ill. Biometrics Law
Associate Molly DiRago and Partner Mark Mao are published in the Expert Analysis section of Law360. Their byline, “Insights On Article III Standing Under Ill. Biometrics Law,” highlights the Biometric Information Protection Act (BIPA) and a recent ruling that creates “an apparent divide between plaintiffs who have voluntarily provided their biometric data and those who have not.” In analyzing several cases, they write, “Unless the plaintiff can show her biometric data was stolen or at risk of being stolen, where a plaintiff gave her biometric information knowingly and willingly, the failure to obtain consent or otherwise inform the user for a subsequent disclosure, will be considered merely a technical violation of BIPA and insufficient to assert Article III standing.” They also write about BIPA’s relevance for employers, “It will be interesting to see how courts deal with the standing issue in the employment context and whether they consider an employee’s submission of biometric data as “voluntary,” particularly where submission was a condition of employment. One thing is certain, as the first state law to address the collection and use of biometric data, BIPA is likely to continue to evolve.”