Senators Call for an End to ICE’s Facial Recognition Tool

Senators Edward J. Markey, Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley have formally asked Acting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director Todd Lyons to cease using the Mobile Fortify smartphone application. Mobile Fortify incorporates biometric identification, including facial recognition, to identify individuals in real time.

The senators contend that facial‑recognition technology remains unreliable and warn that its use could have a chilling effect on activities protected by the First Amendment. They argue that when individuals believe they are being watched, they are less likely to engage in constitutionally protected speech and assembly.

In their letter, the trio requested that ICE provide detailed answers by October 2 regarding who built the Mobile Fortify app, when it was first deployed, whether the agency tested its accuracy, the legal basis for its use, and the current policies governing the tool. They also asked whether ICE would commit to ending the use of the application and, if not, to explain why.

The request was bolstered by signatures from Senators Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Chris Van Hollen, Tina Smith, Bernie Sanders and Representative Adam Schiff, indicating broad bipartisan concern over the agency’s surveillance practices.

Broader Context of Facial‑Recognition Use in Law Enforcement

Recent reporting by The Washington Post revealed that New Orleans police were secretly using facial‑recognition technology on a private network of more than 200 live‑feed cameras for two years. This usage continued despite city ordinances that limit facial‑recognition deployment to searches for specific suspects of violent crimes and require documentation and council reporting.

These incidents underscore a growing controversy surrounding facial‑recognition technology. While a plurality of Americans express support for its use in law enforcement and the workplace, many also call for limitations and safeguards.

Regulatory Landscape and State‑Level Actions

There is currently no comprehensive federal regulation governing facial‑recognition or biometric data use, leaving states to craft their own protective measures. Illinois, for example, requires written consent before biometric data can be collected and allows individuals to sue for damages in cases of misuse.

In Texas, Meta settled for $1.4 billion after allegations that the company collected biometric data from millions of Texans without consent, marking the largest financial settlement ever paid to a single state.

Implications and Next Steps

The senators’ demand for transparency and a halt to Mobile Fortify highlights mounting scrutiny of biometric surveillance tools used by federal agencies. As lawmakers seek answers and potential policy changes, the broader debate over the balance between security benefits and civil liberties is set to continue, with states and corporations alike facing increased pressure to adopt clearer consent and oversight mechanisms.

Used: News Factory APP - news discovery and automation - ChatGPT for Business