NYPD bypassed facial recognition ban to ID pro-Palestinian student protester

> This headline is extremely misleading because it leads you to believe that they are IDing this person because they are a "Pro-Palestinian Student Protester".

It read like a privacy issue. Then I read your comment, and was confused.

> More proper would be "NYPD Bypassed Facial Recognition Ban to ID Rock-Throwing Assailant"

This is inaccurate. The charges were dismissed. At best, it's an alleged rock-throwing assailant.

> In the end, this is not a free speech issue except tangentially; it is a privacy issue.

That's what the original headline suggested to me on first reading. Why did you think the headline was a free speech issue?

That being said, the threat of a government disobeying its own rules and policies is a deterrent to free speech.

  "This is right and proper"

They literally banned the use of the technology!

Here I am referring to their desire to find a person who committed what appeared to be a criminal act.

I am not excusing their use of the technology, only that the state and specifically the police have a compelling interest to find people who commit crimes. There are lots of limitations on their powers to accomplish this end, but we do want police to investigate crimes.