Don't Want ICE To Scan Your Face? Too Bad, You Might Not Have A Choice
The DHS is claiming the right to scan people without their consent—and that’s just part of its growing cache of surveillance tools.
			The Trump administration's immigration crackdown has put more federal immigration officers in public view and equipped them with new facial recognition technology. One of these tools is Mobile Fortify, an app that lets agents collect photos and biometric data like fingerprints on the spot—and people have no chance to refuse. With Mobile Fortify, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers can photograph anyone they encounter and run the image through Department of Homeland Security (DHS) databases, including Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) Traveler Verification Service, which stores photos of people entering the United States. Mobile Fortify performs an instant match and returns identifying details—such as name, nationality, and any deportation orders—while the photo remains in government files for 15 years, even for U.S. citizens.
While the quiet expansion of the surveillance state is troubling enough, a February DHS document recently obtained by 404 Media through a Freedom of Information Act request reveals that federal immigration agents don't allow individuals to consent before collecting this sensitive data. "ICE does not provide the opportunity for individuals to decline or consent to the collection and use of biometric data," the document states.
The document—a Privacy Threshold Analysis (PTA) which outlines the privacy risks of new technologies rolled out by the DHS, according to 404 Media—was jointly prepared by ICE and CBP privacy offices. It identifies CBP as the technical service provider responsible for maintaining Mobile Fortify's back-end systems. ICE field agents use the software on government-issued smartphones, while CBP supplies infrastructure and data services. According to the PTA, access to Mobile Fortify is restricted to ICE agents and officers, a limited group of CBP administrative personnel, and select officers assisting with removal operations.
The stated purpose of Mobile Fortify is to identify noncitizens who are removable from the United States. But the PTA notes that agents may collect information on any individual they encounter, regardless of citizenship, because an officer cannot determine someone's status before performing the check.
Members of Congress have raised concerns about the breadth of the program. Rep. Bennie Thompson (D–Miss.), the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, told 404 Media that ICE officials have said they will prioritize the results of a Mobile Fortify hit over documented proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate.
Thompson called the practice "frightening, repugnant, and unconstitutional," arguing that it risks misidentifying Americans as deportable noncitizens.
The document's revelation is not surprising given the size and scope of ICE's surveillance strategy, which has quietly grown in recent years. Backed by billions of dollars in funding from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, federal immigration agencies have expanded their use of AI-driven facial recognition, location tracking, automatic license plate readers, and other digital surveillance tools. As Reason's Autumn Billings has documented, these systems are increasingly being directed not just at immigration suspects but at protesters and political opponents of the administration—evidence that DHS's surveillance network is being repurposed for broader domestic monitoring.
Some lawmakers, including Sen. Ed Markey (D–Mass.), are pressing the agency to explain its growing reliance on facial-recognition technology and to set limits on how it's used. But, so far, no legislation has been passed to restrict ICE's biometric surveillance, and the agency continues to deploy tools like Mobile Fortify without any formal mechanism for refusal. For now, there appears to be little the public can do to opt out of a system designed to see and store information on everyone.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
				
				
				
The provid covid Karens still wearing masks might be ok.
You guys are the ones who didn't want them "arresting" people in order to see their documents.
Setting your borders retardation completely aside, how else universal medical care and other social welfare supposed to work without a unified global surveillance state?
Even internal to itself, nurses and doctors are going to look at patients and charts and identifying people in order to know who has or hasn't been following their doctor's advice.
Do you think ICE is out taking pictures of peoples' faces because they're really a bunch of secret photogs?
Scans are only good if you can compare to what is already known.
Too late to worry about it now.
Viva la Raza!!!
mi hermano: Madre Morbiðs kvein:
Du er en forræder…
Sounds like insurrection talk. Thats ok. Soon, Seattle will be under martial law.
Seattle?
(to the WKRP theme)
♬ He’s living on the dole in Squirtland, Oregon
WKAR in Squirtland, Oregon ♬
Don't Want ICE To Scan Your Face? Too Bad, You Might Not Have A Choice
In ~2022, I flew to Japan. On the way back to the U.S. you have to go through a special customs area of Haneda Airport. As I walked up to the podium with the nice US customs agent, I began to hand over my passport and boarding pass and the agent said, "No need for that, just look into the camera... what was the purpose of your trip, Mr. James?"
I never gave my name, he never saw a document. Trust me holmes, you've long already been scanned.
Libertarians for the Panopticon!
You really want to freak out? Look at your drivers license, see if there is a picture on it.
They now take your pictures even for domestic flights.
The Cowboys are gonna kick the Cardinals ass tonight.
Viva la Raza!!!
Sportsball? Boring.
Ok pussy.
Not a football fan, are ya?
Football appeals to the low IQ crowd.
I see why you say that. It is most popular among the MAGA deplorables, but I would disagree it’s only for low IQ people.
I'm not FOR the Panopticon, I'm merely pointing out that there is no bear in your trunk, because it escaped years ago.
Odd that it came up Mr. James and not Ms. Reynolds in 2022.
Well anybody who leaves their house is subject to location tracking and facial recognition even if they leave their phone at home. And they don't have an opportunity to decline or consent. Interesting that the Democrat politicians quoted are suddenly worried about about the privacy of illegal immigrants when it was just revealed that the Biden DOJ, Smith and Boasberg secretly seized the private data of Republican senators and house members as well as a lot of other US citizens. They didn't have an option to decline or consent. Reason never shed a tear. Where does Markey stand on that? I don't like any of this shit but it's a brave new world and the paste is long out of the tube.
Unless you can claim ownership of the photons that scatter across your face I have no concerns about passive facial recognition in public. I would support the right of private companies and individuals to collect this information in public and on their property. I cannot reasonably deny federal agents the same simply because they are federal agents. Its when they ask a person to take their hat off to get a good scan or collect fingerprints without consent that it crosses a line.
I would point out that facial recognition has always been a tool of law enforcement and it's use exploded with the high tech invention of the camera. Many years ago I was robbed at gunpoint while delivering pizzas. The local cops apparently believed the perp had actually shot a convenience clerk. They brought me in to look at mug shots and later I sat behind the one way mirror for a line up. Ya know facial recognition stuff. I wasn't any help because I couldn't honestly finger anybody. Anyway the the guy was ultimately prosecuted and convicted based on eye witness testimony, again facial recognition. If this technology is more accurate than the memory of eyewitnesses we may actually see fewer wrongful convictions.
Ha Ha Ha! The bitch on YOUR pro-criminal side demanded the very surveillance you are whining about so STFU. Sorry, you don't have a privacy interest in public as a citizen so why should illegals be exempt?
Reason hasn't completely come to grips on how those cars they so desperately want taxed are identified as they cross over the social construct. If done right...