Fact check: Can travelers opt-out of biometric data collection for certain countries, such as the US or EU?

1. How the U.S. Balances Voluntary Airport Scans with Mandatory Border Biometrics

U.S. airport facial recognition programs run on two distinct tracks: Transportation Security Administration (TSA) checkpoint facial scans operate as voluntary identity-verification options at screening lanes, where travelers may decline the photo and request an alternative manual check without causing permitted delays, while Customs and Border Protection (CBP) entry/exit biometrics have been expanded under a DHS final rule to require photos for all foreign nationals entering and exiting the United States. The DHS rule explicitly excludes U.S. citizens from mandatory CBP photo collection, allowing citizens to pursue manual inspections or alternative identity verification, but non‑citizens face new obligations with reduced ability to opt out after the rule’s implementation deadlines ^{[4] [5] [1] [6]}.

2. Non‑U.S. Nationals in the U.S.: Where Opting Out Is No Longer an Option

DHS’s final rule and related policy announcements make clear that non‑U.S. citizens no longer have an effective opt‑out for CBP’s facial biometric program: the expansion covers all foreign nationals in entry and exit processes, and implementation timelines set by DHS and associated notices indicate that non‑citizen travelers—including Canadians—will be photographed and processed under the biometric regime without an opt‑out route after specified enforcement dates. Government communications and reporting show that after the rule’s operational date, refusal by a non‑citizen to submit required biometrics will lead to denial of entry or processing consequences, reflecting a legal shift toward mandatory data collection for non‑citizens ^{[2] [1]}.

3. Europe’s EES: Mandatory Biometrics for Non‑EU Visitors and No Opt‑Out

The European Commission’s Entry/Exit System (EES) implements a comprehensive biometric requirement for non‑EU travelers, replacing passport stamp practices with fingerprints and facial images and explicitly denying an opt‑out: travelers who refuse to provide required biometric data face denial of entry. The EES rollout began in October 2025 and will reach full operational status by April 2026, with collected biometric data retained for specified periods (commonly three years per reporting). This is a clear-cut policy that positions biometric provision as a precondition for entry into Schengen/ EU territory for third‑country nationals ^{[3] [7] [8]}.

4. Practical Differences at Airports Versus Border Control Desks

In practice, travelers encounter voluntary biometric options at some airport security checkpoints and mandatory biometric collection at immigration control points. TSA checkpoints may offer check-ins using face match systems that passengers can decline; CBP primary processing at ports of entry and the EU’s EES at external borders are framed as compulsory for non‑citizens. This split means that the apparent “option” to refuse a face scan depends on the specific agency, the purpose of the biometric (security screening vs. immigration processing), and the traveler’s nationality. Reported guidance from TSA and CBP confirms this operational distinction between optional screening tools and mandatory border controls ^{[4] [5] [1] [3]}.

5. What Travelers Can Actually Do: Citizenship, Alternatives, and Consequences

Actions available to travelers hinge on citizenship status: U.S. citizens retain clearer alternatives such as manual inspections when encountering domestic TSA or CBP photo capture, whereas non‑U.S. nationals face mandatory participation under the CBP final rule and the EU EES. Alternatives for citizens typically involve identity documents and manual verification processes; for non‑citizens, refusal to provide biometrics risks refusal of entry or detention for further processing. Travelers should consult official agency notices and country entry requirements before travel because the legal obligations and enforcement timelines differ and will determine whether an opt‑out is legally viable ^{[6] [1] [8]}.

6. Why the Policy Differences Matter: Privacy, Compliance, and Travel Planning

The divergence between voluntary security uses and compulsory immigration biometrics reflects trade-offs governments have chosen between border security and individual privacy, with recent rules tipping toward broad biometric coverage for non‑citizens. These policy choices produce practical effects: airlines and consulates may update requirements, travelers face new documentation needs, and privacy advocates will likely contest the expanded data collection. For immediate travel decisions, the salient fact is clear — opt‑out is context‑dependent: citizens of the country they enter often retain choices; foreign visitors to the U.S. and EU should expect mandatory biometric collection and plan accordingly ^{[1] [7] [8]}.