Editorial illustration for Company that sold ICE's face‑recognition app linked to revoked Global Entry
ICE Face-Recognition App Sparks New Legal Battle
Company that sold ICE's face‑recognition app linked to revoked Global Entry
The company that supplied Immigration and Customs Enforcement with its notorious facial‑recognition tool has found itself at the center of a new legal dispute. Plaintiffs allege that the technology, originally marketed for border enforcement, is now being used to flag travelers in domestic airports. When a Minnesota resident tried to understand why a federal officer suddenly mentioned “facial recognition,” the encounter set off a chain reaction that ended with her Global Entry and TSA Precheck status being pulled.
That episode is just one of several statements filed in separate lawsuits, including one brought by the state of Minnesota. The complaints suggest a direct line from the ICE contract to everyday airport screenings, raising questions about how far the software’s reach extends beyond its original purpose. As the litigation unfolds, the focus sharpens on whether the vendor’s product is being deployed in ways that could infringe on civil liberties and disrupt routine travel.
In a declaration earlier this month, a Minnesota woman said her Global Entry and TSA Precheck privileges had been revoked after interacting with a federal agent she was observing who told her they had “facial recognition.” In another declaration for a separate lawsuit, filed by the state of Minnesota...
In a declaration earlier this month, a Minnesota woman said her Global Entry and TSA Precheck privileges had been revoked after interacting with a federal agent she was observing who told her they had "facial recognition." In another declaration for a separate lawsuit, filed by the state of Minnesota, an individual who was stopped and detained by federal agents says an officer told them, "Whoever is the registered owner [of this vehicle] is going to have a fun time trying to travel after this." While CBP says there are "sufficient monitoring protocols" in place for the app, ICE says that the development of monitoring protocols is in progress, and that it will identify potential impacts during an AI impact assessment. According to guidance from the Office of Management and Budget, which was issued before the inventory says the app was deployed for either CBP or ICE, agencies are supposed to complete an AI impact assessment before deploying any high-impact use case.
The Department of Homeland Security has now placed Mobile Fortify on its 2025 AI Use Case Inventory, revealing the vendor behind the facial‑recognition tool that ICE agents deploy in the field. The inventory lists two entries for the system, one tied to customs operations. According to statements filed in Minnesota, a traveler reported that her Global Entry and TSA Precheck status were cancelled after an agent referenced the app’s facial‑recognition capability.
A separate declaration attached to a state‑filed lawsuit cites similar concerns. The disclosures confirm that the technology is being used on both undocumented migrants and U.S. citizens, but they do not explain the criteria for revoking trusted‑traveler benefits.
It is unclear whether the agency’s internal policies require a formal review before such actions are taken. Is the oversight sufficient? The public record stops short of detailing how the vendor’s contract was awarded or what oversight mechanisms exist.
Details remain sparse. As the inventory becomes part of the official record, stakeholders will likely examine whether the program’s transparency matches its stated purpose.
Further Reading
- Clearview AI's facial recognition technology designed for surveillance of marginalized groups, report reveals - Business & Human Rights Resource Centre
- Records Provide More Insight into ICE Use of Clearview AI, Suggesting Broader Use, Lack of Oversight, and Internal Concerns - EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center)
- Trump's Immigration Crackdown Is Built on AI Surveillance and Disregard for Due Process - Freedom House
Related Reading
Business & Startups Terminal-Bench 2.0 launches with Harbor, testing any container-installable agent
Business & Startups Sonata Software Partners with Adesso to Boost AI-Driven Digital Transformation in Europe
Business & Startups Zuckerberg Unveils Meta Compute to Build Global AI Infrastructure
From Archives Google's Smart Glasses Lead in Software, Yet Lag on Style, Partner Samsung
From Archives Contextual AI unveils Agent Composer, hits top FACTS benchmark score
Common Questions Answered
How did Mobile Fortify's facial recognition technology impact a Minnesota traveler's Global Entry status?
[epic.org](https://epic.org/documents/epic-v-ice-facial-recognition-services/) indicates that facial recognition technologies can be deployed covertly and create significant privacy risks. According to the article, a Minnesota resident had her Global Entry and TSA Precheck privileges revoked after an interaction with a federal agent who mentioned 'facial recognition'. The incident highlights the potential invasive consequences of facial recognition technologies used by federal agencies.
What concerns does the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) raise about facial recognition technology?
[epic.org](https://epic.org/documents/epic-v-ice-facial-recognition-services/) emphasizes that facial recognition can be deployed 'covertly, even remotely, and on a mass scale' with little individual prevention. The technology is particularly concerning because biometric data like facial images cannot be changed, and it enables comprehensive surveillance across social media and public spaces. EPIC has called for a complete ban on face surveillance due to these significant privacy risks.
How has the Department of Homeland Security addressed potential risks in facial recognition technologies?
[dhs.gov](https://dhs.gov/archive/news/2025/01/16/2024-update-dhss-use-face-recognition-face-capture-technologies) announced extensive requirements for facial recognition technologies in September 2023, including thorough testing to prevent bias and disparate impact. The directive ensures U.S. citizens can opt out of non-law enforcement face recognition uses and requires multiple departmental oversight offices to review all FR/FC technologies. These measures aim to balance technological innovation with individual privacy protections.