ILCS » Chapter 740 · Act 14
Illinois Compiled Statutes

740 ILCS 14/5 (2026)

Legislative findings; intent

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(740 ILCS 14/5)
    Sec. 5. Legislative findings; intent. The General Assembly finds all of the following:
    (a) The use of biometrics is growing in the business and security screening sectors and appears to promise streamlined financial transactions and security screenings.
    (b) Major national corporations have selected the City of Chicago and other locations in this State as pilot testing sites for new applications of biometric-facilitated financial transactions, including finger-scan technologies at grocery stores, gas stations, and school cafeterias.
    (c) Biometrics are unlike other unique identifiers that are used to access finances or other sensitive information. For example, social security numbers, when compromised, can be changed. Biometrics, however, are biologically unique to the individual; therefore, once compromised, the individual has no recourse, is at heightened risk for identity theft, and is likely to withdraw from biometric-facilitated transactions.
    (d) An overwhelming majority of members of the public are weary of the use of biometrics when such information is tied to finances and other personal information.
    (e) Despite limited State law regulating the collection, use, safeguarding, and storage of biometrics, many members of the public are deterred from partaking in biometric identifier-facilitated transactions.
    (f) The full ramifications of biometric technology are not fully known.
    (g) The public welfare, security, and safety will be served by regulating the collection, use, safeguarding, handling, storage, retention, and destruction of biometric identifiers and information.
(Source: P.A. 95-994, eff. 10-3-08.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 78 cases (50 in the last 5 years), 2017–2026 · leading case: Watson v. Legacy Healthcare Fin. Servs., LLC, 2021 IL App (1st) 210279 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Watson v. Legacy Healthcare Fin. Servs., LLC, 2021 IL App (1st) 210279 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). · cites it 4× “” 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2018); Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc.”
Cothron v. White Castle Sys., Inc., 2023 IL 128004 (Ill. 2023). · cites it 3× “” 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2018). Indeed, the statute’s provision of liquidated damages of between $1000 and $5000 is itself evidence that the legislature did not intend to impose ruinous liability on businesses.”
Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 180175 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 9× “" 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2016). In this section, the drafters explained that "[a]n overwhelming majority of the public" are apprehensive about the use of biometric identifiers and, as a result, they are "deterred from partaking in biometric identifier-facilitated transactions.”
Tims v. Black Horse Carriers, Inc., 2023 IL 127801 (Ill. 2023). · cites it 3× “In contrast, the full ramifications of the harms associated with biometric technology is unknown (see 740 ILCS 14/5(f) (West 2018)), and absent the Act’s protections, it is unclear when or if an individual would discover evidence of the disclosure of his or her biometrics in…”
McDonald v. Symphony Bronzeville Park, LLC, 2022 IL 126511 (Ill. 2022). · cites it 2× “Rosenbach, 2019 IL 123186, ¶ 35 ; see also 740 ILCS 14/5(c) (West 2016) (once biometrics are compromised, the individual has no recourse, is at heightened risk for identity theft, and is likely to withdraw from biometric-facilitated transactions).”
Jennifer Miller v. Sw. Airlines Co., 926 F.3d 898 (7th Cir. 2019). “Before obtaining any fingerprint, a "private entity" must inform the subject or "the subject's legally authorized representative" in writing about several things, such as the purpose of collecting the data and how long they will be kept, and obtain the consent of the subject or…”
Rosenbach v. Six Flags Ent. Corp., 2019 IL 123186 (Ill. 2019). “Biometrics, however, are biologically unique to the individual; therefore, once compromised, the individual has no recourse, is at heightened risk for identity theft, and is likely to withdraw from biometric-facilitated transactions.”
West Bend Mut. Ins. Co. v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2021 IL 125978 (Ill. 2021). “Therefore, we find that regulating telephone calls, faxes, and e-mails is fundamentally different from regulating the collection, use, storage, and retention of biometric identifiers and information (fingerprints, retina or iris scans, voiceprints, or scans of hand or face…”
Rivera v. Google Inc., 238 F. Supp. 3d 1088 (N.D. Ill. 2017). “To be sure, the only example given in Section 5 relates to in-person transactions (“finger-scan technologies at grocery stores, gas stations, and school cafeterias”), 740 ILCS 14/5(b), but the stated concern is considerably broader than this one application.”
Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 180175 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 7× “” 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2016). In this section, the drafters explained that “[a]n overwhelming majority of the public” are apprehensive about the use of biometric identifiers and, as a result, they are “deterred from partaking in biometric identifier-facilitated transactions.”
Rivera v. Google, Inc., 366 F. Supp. 3d 998 (E.D. Ill. 2018). · cites it 6× “See 740 ILCS 14/5(a) - (g). Indeed, the only specific injury described by the Act's findings is the risk of identity theft, 740 ILCS 14/5(c), (d).”
Mcginnis v. U.S. Cold Storage, Inc., 382 F. Supp. 3d 813 (E.D. Ill. 2019). · cites it 2× “740 ILCS 14/5(c) - (g). To those ends, the Act requires that any private entity that possesses biometric information or identifiers must develop and make available a retention schedule and guidelines for destroying that information.”
Show all 78 citing cases →
— 740 ILCS 14/5(a) — 16 cases
Cothron v. White Castle Sys., Inc., 2023 IL 128004 (Ill. 2023). “” 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2018). Indeed, the statute’s provision of liquidated damages of between $1000 and $5000 is itself evidence that the legislature did not intend to impose ruinous liability on businesses.”
Rivera v. Google, Inc., 366 F. Supp. 3d 998 (E.D. Ill. 2018). “See 740 ILCS 14/5(a) - (g). Indeed, the only specific injury described by the Act's findings is the risk of identity theft, 740 ILCS 14/5(c), (d).”
Cothron v. White Castle Sys., Inc., 2023 IL 128004 (Ill. 2023).
Vance v. Microsoft Corp. (W.D. Wash. 2021).
Vance v. Amazon.com Inc (W.D. Wash. 2021).
— 740 ILCS 14/5(b) — 6 cases
Rivera v. Google Inc., 238 F. Supp. 3d 1088 (N.D. Ill. 2017). “To be sure, the only example given in Section 5 relates to in-person transactions (“finger-scan technologies at grocery stores, gas stations, and school cafeterias”), 740 ILCS 14/5(b), but the stated concern is considerably broader than this one application.”
Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 180175 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “" 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2016). In this section, the drafters explained that "[a]n overwhelming majority of the public" are apprehensive about the use of biometric identifiers and, as a result, they are "deterred from partaking in biometric identifier-facilitated transactions.”
Rivera v. Google, Inc., 366 F. Supp. 3d 998 (E.D. Ill. 2018). “See 740 ILCS 14/5(a) - (g). Indeed, the only specific injury described by the Act's findings is the risk of identity theft, 740 ILCS 14/5(c), (d).”
Rivera v. Google LLC. (N.D. Ill. 2018).
Vance v. Microsoft Corp. (W.D. Wash. 2021).
— 740 ILCS 14/5(c) — 31 cases
Rosenbach v. Six Flags Ent. Corp., 2019 IL 123186 (Ill. 2019). “Biometrics, however, are biologically unique to the individual; therefore, once compromised, the individual has no recourse, is at heightened risk for identity theft, and is likely to withdraw from biometric-facilitated transactions.”
Cothron v. White Castle Sys., Inc., 2023 IL 128004 (Ill. 2023). “” 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2018). Indeed, the statute’s provision of liquidated damages of between $1000 and $5000 is itself evidence that the legislature did not intend to impose ruinous liability on businesses.”
Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 180175 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “" 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2016). In this section, the drafters explained that "[a]n overwhelming majority of the public" are apprehensive about the use of biometric identifiers and, as a result, they are "deterred from partaking in biometric identifier-facilitated transactions.”
McDonald v. Symphony Bronzeville Park, LLC, 2022 IL 126511 (Ill. 2022). “Rosenbach, 2019 IL 123186, ¶ 35 ; see also 740 ILCS 14/5(c) (West 2016) (once biometrics are compromised, the individual has no recourse, is at heightened risk for identity theft, and is likely to withdraw from biometric-facilitated transactions).”
Watson v. Legacy Healthcare Fin. Servs., LLC, 2021 IL App (1st) 210279 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “” 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2018); Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc.”
— 740 ILCS 14/5(d) — 7 cases
Mcginnis v. U.S. Cold Storage, Inc., 382 F. Supp. 3d 813 (E.D. Ill. 2019). “740 ILCS 14/5(c) - (g). To those ends, the Act requires that any private entity that possesses biometric information or identifiers must develop and make available a retention schedule and guidelines for destroying that information.”
Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 180175 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “" 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2016). In this section, the drafters explained that "[a]n overwhelming majority of the public" are apprehensive about the use of biometric identifiers and, as a result, they are "deterred from partaking in biometric identifier-facilitated transactions.”
Rivera v. Google, Inc., 366 F. Supp. 3d 998 (E.D. Ill. 2018). “See 740 ILCS 14/5(a) - (g). Indeed, the only specific injury described by the Act's findings is the risk of identity theft, 740 ILCS 14/5(c), (d).”
Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 180175 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “” 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2016). In this section, the drafters explained that “[a]n overwhelming majority of the public” are apprehensive about the use of biometric identifiers and, as a result, they are “deterred from partaking in biometric identifier-facilitated transactions.”
Aguilar v. Rexnord Corp. (N.D. Ill. 2018).
— 740 ILCS 14/5(f) — 5 cases
Tims v. Black Horse Carriers, Inc., 2023 IL 127801 (Ill. 2023). “In contrast, the full ramifications of the harms associated with biometric technology is unknown (see 740 ILCS 14/5(f) (West 2018)), and absent the Act’s protections, it is unclear when or if an individual would discover evidence of the disclosure of his or her biometrics in…”
Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 180175 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “" 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2016). In this section, the drafters explained that "[a]n overwhelming majority of the public" are apprehensive about the use of biometric identifiers and, as a result, they are "deterred from partaking in biometric identifier-facilitated transactions.”
Rivera v. Google, Inc., 366 F. Supp. 3d 998 (E.D. Ill. 2018). “See 740 ILCS 14/5(a) - (g). Indeed, the only specific injury described by the Act's findings is the risk of identity theft, 740 ILCS 14/5(c), (d).”
Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 180175 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “” 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2016). In this section, the drafters explained that “[a]n overwhelming majority of the public” are apprehensive about the use of biometric identifiers and, as a result, they are “deterred from partaking in biometric identifier-facilitated transactions.”
Stauffer v. Innovative Heights Fairview Heights, LLC (S.D. Ill. 2020).
— 740 ILCS 14/5(g) — 34 cases
Tims v. Black Horse Carriers, Inc., 2023 IL 127801 (Ill. 2023). “In contrast, the full ramifications of the harms associated with biometric technology is unknown (see 740 ILCS 14/5(f) (West 2018)), and absent the Act’s protections, it is unclear when or if an individual would discover evidence of the disclosure of his or her biometrics in…”
Watson v. Legacy Healthcare Fin. Servs., LLC, 2021 IL App (1st) 210279 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “” 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2018); Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc.”
West Bend Mut. Ins. Co. v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2021 IL 125978 (Ill. 2021). “Therefore, we find that regulating telephone calls, faxes, and e-mails is fundamentally different from regulating the collection, use, storage, and retention of biometric identifiers and information (fingerprints, retina or iris scans, voiceprints, or scans of hand or face…”
McDonald v. Symphony Bronzeville Park, LLC, 2022 IL 126511 (Ill. 2022). “Rosenbach, 2019 IL 123186, ¶ 35 ; see also 740 ILCS 14/5(c) (West 2016) (once biometrics are compromised, the individual has no recourse, is at heightened risk for identity theft, and is likely to withdraw from biometric-facilitated transactions).”
Sekura v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., 2018 IL App (1st) 180175 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “" 740 ILCS 14/5 (West 2016). In this section, the drafters explained that "[a]n overwhelming majority of the public" are apprehensive about the use of biometric identifiers and, as a result, they are "deterred from partaking in biometric identifier-facilitated transactions.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.