Comment by Nicol Turner Lee

Brookings senior fellow and CTI director
[...] as 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.
AI Verified source (2022-07-27)
Like Share on X 3mo ago

Quote authenticity verification history

Verification History

AI Verified Verified: the GovInfo hearing PDF labels the section "PREPARED STATEMENT OF NICOL TURNER LEE" dated "JULY 27, 2022," and the quoted passage appears verbatim in that prepared statement on page 44; the leading [...] is a valid omission immediately after "...for Americans in this program," and before "as there is no direct legal basis...". The stored author, date, source URL, and content all match the source. ([govinfo.gov](https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-117hhrg49891/pdf/CHRG-117hhrg49891.pdf)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 3d ago
Disputed Not verbatim as given. Daniel P. Tanciar’s prepared statement in the July 27, 2022 House hearing contains this passage and is correctly attributed to him, but the official source reads as a continuation from the prior sentence: "...this program, as there is no direct legal basis..." rather than starting a new sentence, "There is no direct legal basis..." The rest of the excerpt matches. ([govinfo.gov](https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-117hhrg49891/pdf/CHRG-117hhrg49891.pdf)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 5d ago
AI Unverifiable Partially corroborated but could not confirm exact wording. The source_url (govinfo.gov congressional record CHRG-117hhrg49891) returns HTTP 403 to WebFetch; the Pangiam mirror of the testimony is also 403. Web search confirmed the hearing ("Assessing CBP's Use of Facial Recognition Technology," House Homeland Security Committee, July 2022), the speaker (Daniel P. Tanciar, Pangiam Chief Innovation Officer, former CBP officer), and the general subject matter (CBP air-exit FRT, privacy/civil-liberty trade-offs). However, I could not find the distinctive sentences of this quote verbatim in any accessible source ("no direct legal basis for the air exit program targeting U.S. citizens..." and "My testimony is not calling for a required ban on FRT, at least not currently or perhaps in the future"), so I cannot positively confirm the precise quoted text. Vote alignment is internally consistent and was left unchanged: the quote explicitly states the author is NOT calling for a ban on FRT, so the "against" vote on "Ban the use of AI for mass surveillance" is the correct direction. Marking ai_unverifiable because the primary source is inaccessible and the exact quote could not be independently verified; nothing was deleted or changed. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-8 · 9d ago
replying to Nicol Turner Lee