US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) launched a face-scanning app for local law enforcement agencies that assist the federal government with immigration-enforcement operations. The Mobile Identify app was released on the Google Play store on October 30.
"This app facilitates functions authorized by Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)," a US law that lets Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) delegate immigration-officer duties to state and local law enforcement, according to the Mobile Identify app's description on the Google Play store.
[...]
A screenshot of the app on the Google Play listing shows it requires camera access "to take photos of subjects." More information on how it works was reported today by 404 Media. "A source with knowledge of the app told 404 Media the app doesn't return names after a face search. Instead it tells users to contact ICE and provides a reference number, or to not detain the person depending on the result," the news report said.
[...]
ICE agents themselves already use a face-scanning app called Mobile Fortify. Democratic senators urged ICE to stop using Mobile Fortify in a September letter that also criticized ICE for expanding its delegation of authority to local law enforcement.
[...]
When contacted by Ars today about Mobile Identify, the CBP responded with a statement that discusses Mobile Fortify and its use of facial recognition.The CBP statement said that Mobile Fortify processes photos through the Traveler Verification Service (TVS), a facial comparison matching service that the CBP said does not store biometric data. The CBP said it built the Mobile Fortify app to support ICE operations and that ICE has used it around the country.
[...]
In related news this week, the Department of Homeland Security is proposing rule changes to expand the collection and use of biometric information. The proposed changes are open for public comment until January 2, 2026.
[...]
The proposed rule change would expand the agency's definition of biometrics "to include a wider range of modalities than just fingerprints, photographs and signatures." The proposed definition of biometrics is "measurable biological (anatomical, physiological or molecular structure) or behavioral characteristics of an individual." This includes face and eye scans, vocal signatures, and DNA.
(Score: 2) by bmimatt on Monday November 24, @12:37AM
Of course they did, whatever gets us closer to a form of Orwellian reality of 1984.
(Score: 3, Troll) by DadaDoofy on Monday November 24, @12:45AM (15 children)
From TFA:
"Through a formal agreement, or Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), with DHS [Department of Homeland Security], participating agencies like your Sheriff’s Department can have designated officers who are trained, certified, and authorized to perform certain immigration enforcement functions, helping to identify and process individuals who may be in the country unlawfully. This tool is built to streamline those responsibilities securely and efficiently, directly in the field.”
Sooooooo, is this something bad? Sounds like it's just a tool designed to help law enforcement do their job.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 24, @01:59AM (5 children)
Yeah, it's untrustworthy. But false positives don't bother you, right? If you look like an illegal, it's your own fault. Just make sure you have your papers ready on demand. It's the new USA, babe!
(Score: 1, Troll) by DadaDoofy on Monday November 24, @02:10AM (2 children)
"Yeah, it's untrustworthy."
Says who? You have the receipts?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 24, @04:01PM
Why must you insist upon being stupid on purpose?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 24, @09:12PM
Man, you are funny! Keep those eyes wide shut, bro [azmirror.com]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by epitaxial on Monday November 24, @03:12PM (1 child)
The courts have given a thumbs up to cops detaining people based solely on race or accent spoken. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/09/10/immigration-enforcement-stops-race-language-job/86048527007/ [usatoday.com]
So we really are in the "Papers please!" stage of fascism.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by https on Tuesday November 25, @04:49AM
There's no "please" involved when the agent comes with a loaded gun.
Offended and laughing about it.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Monday November 24, @02:10AM (4 children)
If I'm to trust the left, then law enforcement really is a bad thing. When someone does a bad thing, we should send a counselor, and an EBT card as a gift. Police are always the wrong answer to any problem.
I'm going to buy my defensive radar from Temu, just like Venezuela!
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Monday November 24, @02:50AM (3 children)
That's not what the left has ever claimed.
What the left has claimed, and libertarians have also claimed for a long time, is that law enforcement is ultimately about the wielding of deadly force in pursuit of a particular rule, so if you're going to send in cops you had better make sure that there's an actual rule to enforce that is something worth killing over.
When the situation is not a crime and not really warranting the use of deadly force, cops aren't the right response because their training is completely not in how to handle that. For example, on Thanksgiving a couple of years ago, a family in my area called 911 for assistance because one of their family members was having a schizophrenic episode and their regular mental health support was unavailable due to the holidays. A mental health counselor who works with people with schizophrenia on a regular basis would know exactly what to do. The cop's training was to assess the risks, decide that this person was a threat, and gun them down on the sidewalk. Happy holidays, sorry about your son that I just killed, whoopsie-daisy.
So cops for bank robberies? Sure. Cops for murders? Absolutely. Cops for drunk drivers endangering everyone on the road? Yes, probably the right move. But right now, the government sends out cops for a lot of situations that don't really warrant the application of lethal force because they don't really have anyone else to send. So cops with guns end up responding to calls about stuff like: Loitering (a.k.a. standing around in a place the public is allowed to be, which probably shouldn't be a crime). Littering. Kids using a public pool when some busy-body thinks they shouldn't be able to. Somebody walking in the middle of a street rather than the side. Minor noise complaints.
It's not good for cops, and it's not good for the public. I should also add that American police training is considered a joke compared to their international counterparts: A typical American cop has somewhere around 5 months of academy training before they're out on the streets with a badge and gun. A typical European cop has closer to 3-4 years of training, and often spend the early part of their careers without easy access to lethal force. Or cops in Japan spend a bunch of time on martial arts training so they can subdue suspects without causing permanent injuries, whereas American cops tend to be trained to inflict as much injury as they can get away with (e.g. they're intentionally trained to yell "stop resisting" with non-resisting suspects so they can get away with hitting those same suspects).
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 24, @03:07AM (1 child)
> When the situation is not a crime and not really warranting the use of deadly force, cops aren't the right response ...
This. And even worse is sending in National Guard or other military to perform police functions, since they don't have any police training at all.
What's missing in the USA today is some nuance. There is a big gray area in between the current all-or-nothing response. There are some good examples of this, for example "community policing" where cops walk a neighborhood beat and get to know the locals. But these initiatives seem far and few between.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 24, @04:33AM
> What's missing in the USA today is some nuance.
That's being done on purpose.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday November 25, @12:53AM
And yet - everyone calls the cops for everything from stray dogs, to road rage, to misbehaving children, to - you name it. The schizophrenics own family called law enforcement? WTF? At a family gathering, two or three people who understood the guy's problems couldn't talk him down, and/or overpower him?
Out here in the sticks, we DON'T call 911 every time something goes bump in the night. Consequently, we don't see a lot of dumbasses gunned down by cops. None of my dogs has even been shot by a cop!
I'll point out that sometimes, some people need a good old fashioned ass whipping for their conduct. Corporal punishment, not capital punishment. Street justice. You might take a look at Steve Inman Commentary on Rumble. Those videos can be addictive though, so maybe you don't want to look.
I'm going to buy my defensive radar from Temu, just like Venezuela!
(Score: 2, Informative) by driverless on Monday November 24, @03:55AM
"Hey Cletus, let's go grab up some wetbacks!" isn't really training though is it?
(Score: 2) by epitaxial on Monday November 24, @01:46PM (2 children)
I love how the stereotypical anti big government types get boners over this stuff.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by janrinok on Monday November 24, @03:10PM (1 child)
I don't view this as a political argument - although this discussion is turning it into one.
The "land of the free" seems to be becoming more dystopian as each day goes by. Do you not see this as a form of national surveillance? Many of you now seem to accept digital tracking, the building of huge databases containing photos, DNA, and fingerprints, often because the person is not WASP or looks slightly different and despite them being American? And it includes children. At the same time you mock Europe for having traffic cameras!
The excuse given for the introduction of all of this surveillance is that it is necessary for control of illegal immigrants to which it patently is not being limited. Rather than return entire families you seem to be content with just the father being sent elsewhere without any information for the remaining members of the family to enable then to join them. This now appears to be 'normal' behaviour in the US.
Less than a year into this change to everything that the USA claimed to believe in, many of you have accepted whatever the government says, convincing yourselves that a short period of disruption will lead to something better. The checks and balances are no longer in place, the Constitution is ignored, and you have become so polarised that there is a serious risk of civil war. Your media are being stigmatised if they do not follow the 'party' line. Is your cost of living coming down as you were promised? Are you living better lives - both private and professional - than you were a year ago?
Are you not noticing how many of your former friends and allies are no longer considering you in the same light than they did less than a year ago. Are you blind to the new trade alliances that are being made elsewhere which will leave you with fewer export opportunities and cost a huge number of jobs? Why is it now acceptable to cosy up to world leaders who have blood on their hands - whether they be Arab or Slav?
Khrushchev reportedly said "We do not have to invade the United States, we will destroy you from within." I don't believe he thought it would be this easy otherwise he might have done it there and then. You are destroying yourselves.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 4, Informative) by gnuman on Monday November 24, @06:08PM
The Enemy within is the Enemy in the Mirror. Whoever uses the first term and/or agrees with it, actually is the cause of the downfall. That's the paradox of our human society. It's happening for thousands of years, so why not again. There is no "utopia" based on FUD, only hellscape of repression. We are truly too stupid to learn from history.
There's a reason why multilateralism and cooperation and liberal world order (at least on the surface) were driven as solutions to eternal conflicts driven by fear and FUD. And it worked! But new generations haven't experienced the shit and hell so they are willing to throw it all away because some whackjobs will scare them on internet and a fuckhead like Zuckerberg is allowed to use our Achille's Heel like "engagement" to drive our societies apart to make a fucking buck. /rant
Internet is middle-age's printing press. The witch trials happened *because* of the printing press -- people truly are not smarter today when dealing with FUD.
https://theconversation.com/from-printing-presses-to-facebook-feeds-what-yesterdays-witch-hunts-have-in-common-with-todays-misinformation-crisis-260995 [theconversation.com]