Controversies surrounding immigration policies and enforcement are longstanding in the United States, predating the current administration. Although political priorities continuously shift, concerns about regulating immigration persist. Enforcement occurs at the border and during the application process, consistently remaining a federal priority even as new administrations adopt different approaches. Regardless of political affiliation, lawmakers face a new challenge: the rapid rise of artificial intelligence (AI). From facial recognition at borders to social media screening tools used during the application process, AI has become a vital component of immigration enforcement.^[1] As these technologies expand, American law must balance the government’s interest and reliance on these tools with constitutional guarantees.

AI has become central to immigration enforcement at borders through biometric screening, surveillance systems, and predictive analytics. Biometric identification uses unique physical or behavioral characteristics to verify identity.^[2] U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) uses facial recognition tools to match travelers against existing records or alerts, supporting the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) broader effort to generate a Person-Centric Identity Services system linking multiple immigration databases.^[3] Additionally, AI-driven surveillance technologies, like drones and sensor networks, give authorities an aerial view to identify suspicious vehicles or individuals.^[4] Predictive analytics systems, such as CBP’s “Babel” platform, use AI to scan open-source data and flag potential security risks related to specific travelers.^[5] Collectively, these technologies have transformed border enforcement into a data-driven operation, expanding government oversight.

AI is also deeply embedded in the immigration application process. According to the DHS AI Use Case Inventory, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has a use case (DHS-17) focused on immigration benefit fraud detection and national-security screening through the FDCS-DS NextGen system, which detects fraud, analyzes applicant history, and prioritize cases involving security concerns.^[6] Further, the American Immigration Council reports that AI tools, such as “Babel,” also analyze large volumes of data, including social media content to assess applicant credibility.^[7] Additional tools, such as USCIS’s virtual assistant “Emma,” streamline applicant communication, reducing administrative workloads.^[8] These technologies reflect federal goals outlined OMB Memo M-25-21, which aim to improve efficiency, transparency, and accuracy.^[9]

Proponents for AI use argue that it provides significant benefits to immigration enforcement.^[10] Biometric systems allow CBP to verify identities within seconds, reducing the time required to verify documents and screen travelers.^[11] AI-enabled surveillance increase situational awareness by letting agents monitor larger areas with fewer personnel.^[12] Drones provide real-time imaging and detect irregular activity, expanding officers’ reach while conserving resources.^[13] Similarly, during the immigration application process, DHS uses AI to streamline case management, offering potential gains in administrative efficiency.^[14]

However, these benefits come with significant constitutional and ethical concerns. At the border, the expansion of digital and biometric surveillance challenges long-standing privacy expectations.^[15] Although courts recognize a diminished privacy expectation at international borders, scholars warn that facial recognition and continuous monitoring risk expanding this exception too far.^[16] The reliance on these systems may also dehumanize immigrants by reducing individuals to data profiles.^[17] Similar concerns arise in the application process, where many DHS AI tools are “rights-impacting,” and may influence immigration outcomes without meaningful transparency.^[18] This raises due process concerns under the Fifth Amendment, as applicants often lack insight into how data is used or how decisions are made.^[19] Biased algorithms or unequal data inputs may also generate discriminatory outcomes, undermining Equal Protection principles.^[20] These concerns underscore the need for oversight, transparency, and human accountability across all uses of AI in immigration.

Core immigration statutes predate modern AI, granting the DHS broad authority over admission, exclusion, and removal of immigrants, but offering little guidance on algorithmic systems.^[21] Although DHS publicly reports some AI use through the AI Use Case Inventory, details about system functioning, decision-making, and accuracy remain limited.^[22] Meanwhile, the Office of Management and Budget encourages AI adoption but focus primarily on management and procurement, rather than establishing rules for how AI use in immigration decisions.^[23]

To address the risks posed by AI-driven enforcement, a series of reforms is necessary. First, DHS should expand public, plain-language disclosures explaining how AI influences screening, fraud detection, and adjudication, strengthening public trust and helping applicants understand the process.^[24] Second, agencies should adopt stronger oversight and bias mitigation measures for biometric, surveillance, and fraud-detection systems, which scholars argue currently operate with insufficient safeguards.^[25] Third, DHS should develop clearer internal guidelines for rights-impacting AI, ensuring that systems such as facial recognition, FDNS-NextGen, and Babel do not undermine due process protections.^[26] Finally, Congress should enact statutory standards that regulate AI use in immigration enforcement, providing courts with a clear framework for reviewing agency decisions involving algorithmic tools, while still allowing the use of AI to improve efficiency.^[27]

AI has become an indispensable tool in modern immigration enforcement, offering the government new capabilities in identity verification, surveillance, and case management. However, those innovations create issues regarding privacy, due process, and equal protection. As AI becomes further embedded in border operations and immigration adjudications, policymakers must adopt transparent, accountable, and equitable rules that safeguard constitutional rights. Reasonable oversight, through statutory reform and clear guidelines, can ensure that AI strengthens enforcement rather than diminishing the fairness and integrity of the U.S. immigration system.

^[1]  Biometrics, Homeland Security (Aug. 28, 2025), www.dhs.gov/biometrics.

^[2] Id.

^[3] Steven Hubbard, Invisible Gatekeepers: DHS’ Growing Use of AI in Immigration Decisions, American Immigration Council (May 12, 2025), www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/blog/invisible-gatekeepers-dhs-growing-use-of-ai-in-immigration-decisions/; Hasalyn Modine, DHS Launches Sweeping AI Immigration Plan: A Major Shift for 2025 and Beyond., Boundless, (Mar. 26, 2025), www.boundless.com/blog/dhs-launches-sweeping-ai-immigration-plan-a-major-shift-for-2025-and-beyond/.

^[4] Border Patrol Drone: How Are Drones Used for Border Security?, JOUAV (July 25, 2025), www.jouav.com/blog/border-patrol-drone.html.

^[5] Steven Hubbard, supra note 3.

^[6] United States Citizenship and Immigration Services – AI Use Cases, Homeland Security (Feb. 24, 2025), www.dhs.gov/ai/use-case-inventory/uscis.

^[7] Steven Hubbard, supra note 3.

^[8] Meet Emma, Our Virtual Assistant, Uscis (Apr. 3, 2018,) www.uscis.gov/tools/meet-emma-our-virtual-assistant.

^[9] Russell T. Vought, M-25-21 – Accelerating Federal Use of AI through Innovation, Governance, and Public Trust, Executive Office of the United States (Apr. 3, 2025), www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/M-25-21-Accelerating-Federal-Use-of-AI-through-Innovation-Governance-and-Public-Trust.pdf.

^[10] Saba Mengesha, The Rise of AI and Technology in Immigration Enforcement., The Regulatory Review (Aug. 20, 2024), www.theregreview.org/2024/03/23/the-rise-of-ai-and-technology-in-immigration-enforcement/.

^[11] Anthony Kimery, DHS Expands Biometric Entry-Exit, CBP to Photograph All Noncitizens at US Borders: Biometric Update, Biometrics News (Oct. 27, 2025), www.biometric update.com/202510/dhs-expands-biometric-entry-exit-cbp-to-photograph-all-noncitizens-at-us-borders.

^[12] Border Patrol Drone: How Are Drones Used for Border Security?, supra note 4.

^[13] Id.

^[14] United States Citizenship and Immigration Services – AI Use Cases, supra note 6.

^[15] Artl.S8.C18.8.7.2 Aliens in the United States, Constitution Annotated, constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artl-S8-C18-8-7-2/ALDE_00001262/ (last visited Apr. 2, 2026); Saba Mengesha, supra note 10.

^[16] Saba Mengesha, supra note 10.

^[17] Chris Gosier, How Should AI Be Used in Immigration? Cautiously, Experts Say, Fordham Now ( Mar. 13, 2025), www.now.fordham.edu/university-news/how-should-ai-be-used-in-immigration-cautiously-experts-say/.

^[18] Steven Hubbard, supra note 3.

^[19] Artl.S8.C18.8.7.2 Aliens in the United States, supra note 15.

^[20] Chris Gosier, supra note 17.

^[21] Artl.S8.C18.8.7.2 Aliens in the United States, supra note 15.

^[22] United States Citizenship and Immigration Services – AI Use Cases, supra note 6.

^[23] White House Releases New Policies on Federal Agency AI Use and Procurement, The White House (Apr. 7. 2025), www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/04/white-house-releases-new-policies-on-federal-agency-ai-use-and-procurement/.

^[24] United States Citizenship and Immigration Services – AI Use Cases, supra note 6.

^[25] Steven Hubbard, supra note 3; Saba Mengesha, supra note 10; Chris Gosier, supra note 17.

^[26] Biometrics, supra note 1; Steven Hubbard, supra note 3; Border Patrol Drone: How Are Drones Used for Border Security?, supra note 4.

^[27] Hasalyn Modine, supra note 3; White House Releases New Policies on Federal Agency AI Use and Procurement, supra note 23; Artl.S8.C18.8.7.2 Aliens in the United States, supra note 15.