By Luke Parker
Baltimore Watchdog Staff Writer
The American Civil Liberties Union and its Maryland branch are suing the Baltimore Police Department over a controversial program that will allow surveillance planes to fly over the city to track crime, the groups announced Thursday.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court, challenges the constitutionality of the city’s surveillance contract that was narrowly approved by the Board of Estimates last week. The contract authorizes a pilot program to collect images of the city over a 180-day test trial to help the Police Department investigate murders, nonfatal shootings, armed robberies and car jackings.
During the six-month period, the Texas-based organization Arnold Ventures will pay for three planes, their pilots, analysts and hanger space, as well as grants to help researchers conclude whether the program is making an impact on both Baltimore’s crime rate and the efficiency of the police department. Officials estimate the half-year cost at $3.7 million, about $1.5 million above the original proposal.
The ACLU, whose public grievances over the Aerial Investigation Research (AIR) Pilot Program date back to December, charged that the surveillance system “presents a threat” to citizens’ sense of privacy – especially that of people of color.
“Putting residents under continuous, aerial surveillance will impact the privacy rights of everyone,” ACLU attorney David Rocah said in a press release. “But it is especially dangerous for black and brown communities.”
“Baltimore is a city with a terrible history of racism and lack of accountability for abuses by police,” Rocah added. “It’s the last place a novel system of mass surveillance should be tested.”
Commissioner Michael Harrison, who was publicly skeptical about the plan in the past, said he and the department have taken preventive measures to ensure that the program is not abused. The resolution – 1 pixel per person, according to the Police Department’s website – will not be crisp enough to identify “any physical features,” but it should be able to track movement. Also, the data will only be made available to detectives after a case has both occurred and been reported to the police.
“We’re only looking back,” the commissioner said during an online educational seminar in March. “We’re looking back in time to see where a perpetrator would have gone after a crime has been committed or would have come from before a crime was committed.”
Brett Max Kaufman, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s Center for Democracy, said the program and the technology would be the most “wide-reaching surveillance dragnet” ever used in an American city.
“If it’s allowed to move forward, it could become a chilling and all-seeing part of daily life all over the country,” Kaufman said in the press release. “This technology is the equivalent to having a police officer follow you every time you leave the house. It presents a society-changing threat to everyone’s rights to privacy and free association, and we need to put a stop to it now.”
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle, a grassroots think tank; Ericka Bridgeford, co-founder of the Baltimore Ceasefire 365 project; and, Kevin James, a community organizer and hip-hop artist.
“The best way to reduce violence is through community building and healing strategies – not through military-grade surveillance programs,” Bridgeford said. “Rather than investing time and energy in futuristic surveillance, the city of Baltimore and the Baltimore Police Department should invest in programs to address the root causes of violence.”
The ACLU also objected last week as the Board of Estimates considered the plan, questioning the purpose of beginning the program during the coronavirus outbreak. Baltimore residents, like those in the rest of Maryland and much of the United States, are under a stay-at-home order in response to the international pandemic.
“We’re going to start a study of this technology’s effectiveness when the entire city and state is on mandatory lockdown?” Rocah asked during the Board of Estimates meeting. “Virtually none of the data collected now would be usable.”
The Board of Estimates approved the plan by a 3-2 vote. Mayor Bernard C. “Jack” Young voted in favor of the planes, along with Matthew Garbark, acting director of public works, and Dana Moore, acting city solicitor. However, Council President Brandon Scott and Comptroller Joan Pratt voted against the plan.
The planes can begin flying this month, according to the contract.