| A defendant was compelled to use their face to unlock their computer in a recent case (2021) [1]. The reasoning given by an analyst: > requiring a defendant to expose his face to unlock a computer can be lawful, and is not far removed from other procedures that are now routinely approved by courts, with proper justification: standing in a lineup, submitting a handwriting or voice exemplar, or submitting a blood or DNA sample Contrasting the logic used by a judge in a similar case in (2019) [2]: > If a person cannot be compelled to provide a passcode because it is a testimonial communication, a person cannot be compelled to provide one’s finger, thumb, iris, face, or other biometric feature to unlock that same device Ars has a summary of more cases [3]. It looks like in several instances state courts allowed the devices to be unlocked using biometrics, but the rulings were reversed at the federal level. In many cases a warrant was required. 1. https://archive.is/i2Bx9 2. https://archive.is/px2Qz 3. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/indiana-supreme-... |