The ACLU is wrong here. They have been weakening on free speech issues, and the consequence is that they fall for related fallacies.

Suppose the company simply sold an index of where to find face photos for various people. Suppose someone with this list tripped a web archive like archive.is to store each photo. Suppose another person writes a tool that can pull up the face photo and put it on the left of your screen, leaving you free to compare it to a photo on the right. And suppose lastly you've downloaded and installed a free GPL software program that lets you compare the faces according to biometrics and see if they are the same. Who committed the crime?

Now that is NOT to say I want these bastards tracking faces all over the world. But we must first rule out the impossible before we can focus our attention on what is left. If we can't keep a company from compiling faceprints, what can we do??? Like DUH, we can keep people from USING THEM!

Advantages of building the wall there include the millions of people who will be duped or forced into giving "consent" by countless very important organizations, like employers, who aren't "protected" by the censorship-level restriction.

So what am I saying? Well, I'm saying you can't discriminate against a customer or employee for refusing to be faceprinted, or force them to submit to biometric comparisons. They have to make accommodations. It is at the same level as barring businesses from discriminating by race or even handicap. Americans don't like to think of some punk from the government trying to tell Business who they can do Business with, but there it is. A business that surreptitiously looks up faces to give one person a discount over another should be treated exactly the same - legally and emotionally - as a business that charges higher prices if you are black or female.