Seriously, Target? How on earth did you think it was okay to secretly collect and store customers’ biometric data without so much as a heads-up? Spoiler alert: it’s not okay, and the court system seems to agree with that little detail. A federal judge is now allowing a class-action lawsuit to move forward, accusing the retail giant of flagrantly violating Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA).
The lawsuit, filed in May by four Illinois women, claims Target used facial recognition software in its stores to gather customer data without bothering to tell them. That’s a big no-no under Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), which has been around since 2008. The law makes it clear that businesses must inform people in writing and get their consent before collecting sensitive biometric data.
Here’s the kicker—Target allegedly used its surveillance cameras to capture scans of people’s faces, storing that data without explaining how it’s used, for how long, or who might get access to it. This isn’t just about shoplifters; it’s about “everyone” walking into their stores, completely unaware their faces were being logged into some secret database.
Target tried to weasel out of the lawsuit by claiming the women based their accusations on news stories rather than personal experiences. One such story from CBS in 2018 detailed Target’s National Investigation Center, where video feeds from all its stores are monitored. Real comforting, right?
But District Judge Jeremy Daniel wasn’t buying Target’s excuses. He ruled that the women presented a coherent argument with a legitimate basis for their claims. “This is not a case where the complaint offers no basis for the allegation that Target disclosed biometric data,” Judge Daniel said. Translation: Nice try, but no.
Adding insult to injury, one plaintiff alleges a loss prevention employee followed her around a Target store, and—get this—a Target manager viewed her LinkedIn profile shortly after she entered the store. Creepy much?
Target now has until December 13 to respond, but the damage is done. Trust is a fragile thing, and right now, Target’s looking more like a surveillance state than a friendly neighborhood store.
