EPIC vs. DHS: The Biometric Dragnet

DNA. Iris scans. Voiceprints. From children. From citizens. 6,000 people said no. DHS hasn't listened yet.

TL;DR: DHS proposed a rule in November 2025 to collect DNA, iris scans, voiceprints, and palm prints from every immigration applicant regardless of age—including U.S. citizens who sponsor family members. EPIC filed a formal demand to rescind the rule on January 2, 2026. The Institute for Justice flagged Fourth Amendment violations. 49 House members sent a bipartisan letter demanding DHS withdraw. Over 6,000 public comments poured in, overwhelmingly negative. DHS tried this before in 2020 and backed down. The question: will they back down again?

What DHS Wants to Collect

On November 3, 2025, DHS published a proposed rule that would radically expand what biometric data USCIS collects from people filing immigration paperwork.[1] Right now, USCIS takes photographs, fingerprints, and signatures. Standard stuff.

The new rule would add:

  • DNA samples — for "relationship verification" and to determine "biological sex"
  • Iris scans — justified by the edge case of applicants missing fingers
  • Voiceprints — with no stated justification EPIC could identify
  • Palm prints — expanding the fingerprint collection
  • Facial recognition imagery — beyond standard photographs

And the rule would remove all age restrictions. Infants. Toddlers. Every child associated with an immigration filing would be subject to biometric collection.[2]

It's Not Just Immigrants

Here's the part DHS buried in the regulatory language: the rule applies to "any applicant, petitioner, sponsor, supporter, derivative, dependent, beneficiary or individual filing or associated with a benefit request."[1]

That includes:

  • U.S. citizens who sponsor a spouse or family member
  • Lawful permanent residents filing renewal paperwork
  • Employers who petition for foreign workers
  • Children of any age listed on an application

Tahmineh Dehbozorgi at the Institute for Justice put it plainly: "This data collection would not be limited to just immigrants."[3] An American citizen sponsoring their spouse for a green card could be required to hand over DNA.

EPIC's Response: Rescind the Whole Thing

On January 2, 2026—the final day of the public comment period—EPIC submitted a detailed opposition demanding USCIS rescind the proposed rule entirely. Not revise it. Kill it.[2]

Their core arguments:

No Evidence of Need

USCIS claims widespread identity fraud justifies the expansion. EPIC says they provided zero evidence. The agency already collects photographs, fingerprints, and signatures—and hasn't shown those aren't working.[2]

Immutable Data, Permanent Risk

"Biometric data is uniquely sensitive because it is immutable—if compromised, it cannot be changed," EPIC wrote. You can reset a password. You can't reset your DNA or your iris pattern.[2]

DHS's Own Rules Violated

DHS has Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPPs) that are supposed to guide how the agency handles personal data. EPIC argued the proposed rule violates every single one of them: purpose limitation, data minimization, transparency, security safeguards.[2]

No Breach Plan

USCIS didn't account for the cost of protecting this data. No cybersecurity budget. No breach risk analysis. They're proposing to build one of the largest biometric databases in the country without explaining how they'll keep it safe.[2]

The DNA Problem

DNA collection is where this gets darkest. The rule would let USCIS demand DNA tests for two stated purposes: verifying genetic relationships between applicants, and determining "biological sex" when it's "relevant to certain immigration benefit requests."[1]

EPIC flagged the sex-testing provision as a weapon against transgender, intersex, and nonbinary people: "Biological sex is routinely misused to police and target intersex, transgender, and nonbinary people, and USCIS's proposal would codify that misuse into federal practice."[2]

But the bigger threat is what happens to the DNA after collection. Justice Antonin Scalia warned about exactly this scenario in his 2013 dissent in Maryland v. King, where the Supreme Court upheld DNA collection from arrested persons. Scalia called it a step toward a "genetic panopticon."[3]

The Institute for Justice is now arguing that DHS is trying to build that panopticon through civil immigration cases—collecting DNA from people who haven't been charged with anything and retaining it indefinitely for future law enforcement use.[3]

Permanent Surveillance by Design

Here's a provision that got less attention: if the rule is finalized, foreign nationals granted immigration benefits would be subject to continuous biometric screening and vetting throughout their stay in the United States—until they naturalize as citizens.[4]

That's not a background check. That's ongoing surveillance. Your biometric data continuously run against databases. For years. Possibly decades.

Meanwhile, DHS centralized control of its biometric databases in August 2025, consolidating over 300 million profiles of facial recognition data, fingerprints, and iris scans under one roof.[3] The proposed rule would feed directly into that system.

6,000 Comments. 49 Congress Members. Overwhelmingly Against.

The public comment period closed on January 2, 2026, with over 6,000 submissions. The vast majority were negative.[5]

In December 2025, Rep. Yvette D. Clarke (D-NY) led a bipartisan group of 49 House members in a letter to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and USCIS Director Joseph Edlow demanding they withdraw or substantially revise the proposal. The lawmakers wrote that the rule "risks undermining civil rights, eroding public trust, and exposing millions of people to irreversible privacy harms."[5]

Organizations that filed formal opposition include:

  • Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) — demanded full rescission[2]
  • Institute for Justice (IJ) — flagged Fourth Amendment violations and lack of Congressional authorization[3]
  • Kids in Need of Defense (KIND) — argued biometrics from infants provide "little adjudicative value while exposing them to lifelong privacy risks"[5]
  • Identity Project — cited First and Fourth Amendment violations[5]
  • Truman National Security Project[5]

There's very little organized support for the rule. The loudest voices in favor are DHS itself.

DHS Tried This Before

In 2020, DHS pushed a nearly identical biometric expansion proposal. It also drew thousands of negative comments. DHS withdrew the rule without finalizing it.[3]

The 2026 version is broader. More biometric modalities. Wider scope of affected individuals. DNA collection provisions that didn't exist in the 2020 version. DHS is betting that the political climate has shifted enough that it can push through what failed six years ago.

The estimated cost: $288.7 million annually, including $57.1 million just for DNA submissions. DHS expects 1.12 million additional biometric submissions per year.[1]

What You Can Do

If You Filed Immigration Paperwork

  • The rule is not in effect yet. It's a proposed rule, not a final one.
  • You are not currently required to provide DNA, iris scans, or voiceprints.
  • If USCIS requests biometrics beyond photos, fingerprints, and signatures before the rule is finalized, that's not authorized. Contact an immigration attorney.

If You Care About Privacy

  • The comment period has closed, but DHS is reviewing feedback. Contact your representatives and tell them to oppose the rule.
  • Support organizations fighting it: EPIC, Institute for Justice, ACLU.
  • Follow the docket on Regulations.gov for updates on whether DHS revises or finalizes the rule.

The Bottom Line

DHS wants to build one of the largest biometric databases in the country. DNA, iris scans, voiceprints, palm prints—from anyone who touches the immigration system, including U.S. citizens. No age limit. No evidence it's needed. No plan for what happens when it gets breached.

EPIC, the Institute for Justice, 49 members of Congress, and over 6,000 members of the public have said no. DHS tried the same thing in 2020 and retreated. Whether they retreat again depends on whether the opposition stays loud enough.

The rule isn't final. That means there's still time to stop it.

References

  1. Federal Register — Collection and Use of Biometrics by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (November 3, 2025)
  2. EPIC — Opposes Dangerous Expansion of Biometric Data Collection and Urges USCIS to Rescind Proposed Rule (January 2, 2026)
  3. Reason — DHS Invokes Immigration Enforcement To Justify Gathering Americans' DNA (January 9, 2026)
  4. Erickson Immigration Group — DHS Proposes Sweeping Expansion of Biometric Data Collection for Immigration Applicants
  5. Biometric Update — Advocacy Groups Warn DHS Against Sweeping Expansion of Immigration Biometrics (January 2026)
  6. ID Tech Wire — EPIC Urges USCIS to Withdraw Proposed Rule Expanding Collection and Use of Biometrics Including DNA
  7. Identity Week — EPIC Opposes Expanded Biometric Powers in Proposed Immigration Rule