Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker has sent the police reform bill back to the state legislature, requesting that several sections be removed – notably, a provision establishing a statewide prohibition on the use of facial recognition technology by law enforcement and public entities, which would have been the first such ban in the nation.

The legislation, which also included restrictions on the use of rubber bullets and tear gas by police, was approved by both the House and Senate on December 1st, following months of negotiation and compromise among key legislators. The bill was introduced to the legislature following the death of George Floyd, an unarmed Black man killed by a white Minneapolis police officer who has since been charged with murder.

Governor Baker communicated to lawmakers his concerns regarding the proposed ban, stating that facial recognition technology has been instrumental in securing convictions in several criminal cases, including those involving a child sex offender and a perpetrator of a double homicide.

In a statement to The Boston Globe, Baker affirmed his unwillingness to approve legislation that includes a ban on facial recognition technology.

As written, the bill would prevent police and public agencies throughout the state from utilizing facial recognition, with the sole exception being permitted searches against the state’s driver license database when conducted with a valid warrant. The legislation also mandates the annual publication of data detailing the number of searches performed by law enforcement officials.

The Massachusetts House approved the bill by a vote of 92-67, while the Senate passed it 28-12 – neither chamber achieving a majority sufficient to override a potential veto.

The Boston Globe reported that Governor Baker has not explicitly stated his intention to veto the bill. Once the legislature resubmits a revised version of the bill, or the original version, to the governor, he has the option to sign it into law, veto it, or allow it to become law without his signature after a period of ten days, as permitted by Massachusetts law.

“Unrestricted police application of surveillance technologies also infringes upon fundamental rights to anonymity, privacy, and freedom of expression. We encourage the legislature to disregard Governor Baker’s proposed amendment and to enact sensible regulations governing governmental use of facial surveillance,” stated Carol Rose, Executive Director of the ACLU of Massachusetts.

A representative from Governor Baker’s office did not respond to a request for comment at the time of this report.