In China, facial-recognition technology works in tandem with security cameras to “track and control” a Muslim minority group. In the U.K., newscasters used Amazon’s Rekognition to identify guests at the royal wedding. But in San Francisco, the birthplace of facial-recognition tech, lawmakers are taking proactive steps to curtail its influence; on Tuesday, the city became the first in the country to vote to ban its use by law-enforcement. The technology, A.C.L.U. lawyer Matt Cagle told The New York Times, gives government “unprecedented power to track people going about their daily lives.” That, he argued, is “incompatible with a healthy democracy.”

Facial-recognition technology, which has improved in recent years, has become ubiquitous—you may even use it to unlock your phone. It’s used by police departments in cities like Chicago, New York, and Arapaho County, Colorado, where it helped to solve a pickpocketing case in 2018. Proponents say it’s a valuable tool for public safety. “It is ridiculous to deny the value of this technology in securing airports and border installations,” Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law expert at George Washington University, told the Times.

To civil-liberties groups and San Francisco lawmakers, however, it’s ripe for government abuse. The measure to ban its use by police passed the city’s board of supervisors 8-1. “I think part of San Francisco being the real and perceived headquarters for all things tech also comes with a responsibility for its local legislators,” said Aaron Peskin, the city supervisor who sponsored the bill. “We have an outsize responsibility to regulate the excesses of technology precisely because they are headquartered here.”

Even as it becomes more commonplace, significant flaws have emerged in facial-recognition tech. As S.A. Applin noted in an illuminating Fast Company piece last week, the software isn’t as accurate in identifying non-white, non-cisgender people, which could result in data being “misinterpreted and misapplied.” Advocates say the field is “still evolving.” The fear is that, as with social-media platforms like Facebook, the software itself will be developed and implemented faster than regulations can protect people’s privacy. As such, other cities like Oakland, California, and Somerville, Massachusetts, are considering their own legislative bans. “When you have the ability to track people in physical space,” Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, told the Times, “in effect everybody becomes subject to the surveillance of the government.”

More Great Stories from Vanity Fair

— Inside the Zuckerberg–Winklevoss conference-room showdown

— How Michael Cohen spent his final days before prison

— Was this former Trump adviser scamming elderly MAGA voters?

— How Bono’s investment partner got busted in the college-admissions scandal

— If impeaching Trump is too tricky, is Barr a softer target for the Democrats?

Looking for more? Sign up for our daily Hive newsletter and never miss a story.