Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How can non-U.S. citizens request to opt out of CBP facial recognition in 2025?
Executive Summary
Non-U.S. citizens will be photographed by CBP under a rule taking effect December 26, 2025, but the publicly available materials in the provided dataset do not supply a clear, standardized opt-out procedure for non-citizens. The official guidance that exists describes voluntary alternatives for U.S. citizens and points to manual document inspection, suggesting possible but unconfirmed paths for non-citizens to avoid facial-capture by requesting alternative processing through CBP officers or by contacting CBP directly [1] [2] [3].
1. What the public materials actually claim — and what's missing
The documents in the dataset uniformly state that CBP will collect facial images from noncitizens at U.S. ports of entry and departures, with a final rule effective December 26, 2025, to expand biometric collection [1] [4]. The key claim is unambiguous: non-U.S. citizens can be photographed upon entry and exit. However, none of the supplied sources provides an explicit, step‑by‑step mechanism for a non‑citizen to file a formal opt‑out request that guarantees alternative processing. The privacy policy and rule texts reference voluntary participation language and alternative processing for citizens, but they stop short of specifying an administrative form, a dedicated CBP office procedure, or legal exemption language that non‑citizens can invoke [2] [5].
2. How CBP describes alternatives for U.S. citizens — a clue, not an instruction
CBP materials note that U.S. citizens who decline facial-photo capture may request alternative processing, which CBP characterizes as manual review of travel documents by an officer rather than biometric comparison [3]. This establishes a precedent within CBP practice that refusing a biometric capture does not automatically bar entry processing; instead, it triggers non-biometric document verification pathways. That precedent suggests a practical model non-citizens might follow: express objection and ask for manual inspection. Yet the documents in the dataset do not confirm whether the alternative-processing policy will be applied to noncitizens under the December 2025 rule, leaving an implementation gap between stated citizen options and non-citizen practice [2] [3].
3. The final rule expands collection but omits clear opt‑out mechanics for noncitizens
The final rule and supporting Federal Register materials emphasize collection of biometric data from aliens for entry and exit records, with a public comment period referenced in October 2025 documents and an effective date in late December 2025 [4] [5]. Those regulatory texts formalize the capture requirement but do not codify an opt‑out procedure for non‑U.S. citizens. The absence of opt‑out language in the rule contrasts with CBP’s privacy policy statements about voluntary participation for citizens, leaving legal and operational questions about whether frontline officers will be instructed to accept refusals from noncitizens and how such refusals would affect admissibility processing [4] [5].
4. Practical pathways that appear plausible from available documents
Based on CBP’s existing citizen‑focused language and standard border operations, two plausible pathways emerge for noncitizens seeking to avoid facial recognition: explicitly requesting manual document inspection from a CBP officer at the port of entry/exit, or contacting CBP in advance through official channels to ask about processing options; Form I‑192 and other visa‑adjudication processes are unrelated opt‑ins and do not serve as opt‑out requests [3] [6]. None of the dataset sources confirms a guaranteed outcome for those requests, and Form I‑192 pertains to admissibility waivers and biometric submission rather than opt‑out of facial capture, so it should not be relied upon as an opt‑out mechanism [6].
5. What the documents recommend people do now — and what agencies should clarify
The materials implicitly advise seeking direct CBP guidance — through the agency’s privacy policy channels or frontline officers — but provide no formal petition or administrative remedy for non‑citizen opt‑outs [2] [3]. Individuals should document any refusal or request for alternative processing (ask for officer name, time, and written confirmation if available) and consider submitting written inquiries to CBP’s public affairs or privacy offices. The absence of explicit opt‑out instructions in the final rule means stakeholders, advocacy groups, and legal counsel should press CBP and DHS for clear operational directives and written guidance before the December 26 effective date [4] [1].
6. The policy context, potential agendas, and what to watch next
The expansion of biometric collection is framed by DHS as an entry‑exit control and national‑security modernization measure, while privacy advocates point to civil‑liberties and due‑process concerns; both perspectives appear across the rulemaking materials and commentary period [1] [5]. The public comment window and agency messaging through October 2025 reveal an administrative agenda to normalize biometrics, yet the legal and operational silence on noncitizen opt‑out procedures may reflect either an oversight or a deliberate choice to leave discretion to frontline officers. Watch for updated CBP guidance, policy memos, or FAQs released before or on the rule’s effective date that explicitly address non‑citizen requests for alternative processing and record those releases as the authoritative procedural source [4] [2].