Walmart accused of collecting customers’ voiceprints

A group of Walmart customers say the supermarket retained their biometrics, running afoul of Illinois data privacy laws.CHICAGO (CN) — A group of shoppers say in a class action that retail giant Walmart is illegally collecting their biometrics.In a 15-page complaint, customers described how they’d periodically call the Walmart customer service line. Unbeknownst to them, however, Walmart creates a voiceprint or biometric identifier with an artificial intelligence system every time someone calls the customer service line.“Despite having her voiceprint taken, Defendant never informed [plaintiffs] of the specific limited purposes for which it collected, stored, or used her biometric identifier, other than to play the automatic message that her voice could be taken for business purposes, including fraud prevention,” the two lead plaintiffs write in the complaint.Walmart’s privacy policy, which was updated on June 18, 2026, states that Walmart collects biometrics, like voiceprints, when a customer contacts them. The privacy policy further states that “when you speak to customer service we collect your personal information using call recording technology in accordance with applicable law.”The named plaintiffs — two Illinois residents — however, say Walmart’s privacy policy is not accordance with local laws. They brought the class action filed Tuesday under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, which regulates the collection and use of biometric identifiers.The statute makes it illegal to “collect, capture, purchase, receive through trade, or otherwise obtain a person’s or a customer’s biometric identifiers or biometric information, unless it first: (1) informs the subject … in writing that a biometric identifier or biometric information is being collected or stored; (2) informs the subject … in writing of the specific purpose and length of term for which a biometric identifier or biometric information is being collected, stored, and used; and (3) receives a written release executed by the subject of the biometric identifier or biometric information.”A Walmart spokesperson did not respond to Courthouse News Service’s request for comment. The plaintiffs are seeking statutory damages of $1,000 to $5,000 for each of Walmart’s violations of the Illinois law.“Defendant’s collection and storage of biometric identifiers and/or biometric information exposes consumers to serious and irreversible privacy risks. For example, if an employee database is hacked, breached, or otherwise exposed, employees have no means by which to prevent identity theft and unauthorized tracking,” they write.The limits of biometrics class actions have already been tested in Illinois state and federal courts. A class of White Castle employees sued the fast food giantin 2019 for biometrics law violations because they were required to scan their fingerprints to clock in and out of work.The burger chain didn’t challenge the initial breach of its employees’ biometrics; it instead argued that a person’s biometrics cannot be regained once they’re lost. Thus, a breach on employees’ biometrics only occurred the first time they clocked in after the law was passed in 2008.In 2023, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that a biometrics claim accrues each time an employee scans their fingerprint, and an Illinois federal judge later awarded the White Castle employees a $9.39 million settlement.The BIPA statute was later amended, however, in part to address the 2023 Supreme Court decision. In 2024, Illinois Governor JB Pritzker signed Senate Bill 2979, which limits the statutory damages to a single violation per claimant.A Seventh Circuit panel reaffirmed the new amendment in April, and determined that it did apply retroactively to cases pending at the time it was enacted.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads