Comment by Daniel P. Tanciar

There is no direct legal basis for the air exit program targeting U.S. citizens, as the law establishing it only called for the surveillance of foreign nationals, until former President Trump’s Executive Order to verify the identity of all travelers at airports, including Americans. But the trade-offs to its non-use may result in longer wait times for passengers and an increased demand for agents that conduct manual checks. Thus, while there are inherent and potential privacy and civil rights concerns with this CBP program, the trade-offs of convenience resonate among agency staff and travelers who mitigate and give up their privacy and rights as part of the process. It is for these and other reasons that CBP and other agencies leveraging FRT must be on alert because a technology used for convenience should not have unforeseen consequences on travelers and citizens, more broadly. My testimony is not calling for a required ban on FRT, at least not currently or perhaps in the future. Rather, Congress and other stakeholders must thoroughly interrogate these models to ensure that they are not creating a new wave of systemic biases and discrimination. Unverified source (2022)