Can travelers refuse fingerprint or facial scans at US airports in 2025?

1. Why this fight matters now — biometrics move from pilots to rules

Federal agencies finalized rules in late 2025 that transition biometric screening from pilots to a nationwide, statutory obligation for aliens, dramatically increasing the scale and permanence of data collection. The Department of Homeland Security’s final rule, published in October 2025 and set to take effect December 26, requires photographs of all noncitizens on entry and exit and allows collection of other biometrics such as fingerprints; the rule removes many prior exemptions and enables storage and matching across systems with retention periods that can extend up to 75 years for noncitizens ^{[1] [2]}. That regulatory shift transforms an optional convenience into a near‑universal legal requirement for most foreign nationals, heightening stakes for privacy, immigration enforcement, and cross‑border travel operations ^{[1] [3]}.

2. What U.S. citizens can and cannot refuse at airport kiosks and gates

Agency statements and policies as of 2025 consistently state that U.S. citizens may decline facial recognition and request alternative, manual processing, particularly when interacting with TSA checkpoints for domestic travel or with CBP when reentering the country, with CBP guidance noting alternatives like a document inspection by an officer ^{[4] [5] [6]}. Coverage notes vary: citizen photos used in automated matching are often retained briefly (CBP commonly cites up to 12 hours for citizen photos) and DHS materials say citizens may participate voluntarily ^{[3] [7]}. Nonetheless, oversight reporting and advocacy groups highlight incidents where signage or frontline practices created confusion or where travelers were told erroneously that biometrics were mandatory, so opt‑out rights may be real but inconsistently implemented at the airport level ^{[3] [7]}.

3. Noncitizens face a different legal reality — refusal is often not an option

For aliens (non‑U.S. citizens) the landscape is markedly different: the DHS/CBP final rule explicitly requires photographs for all aliens at U.S. ports of entry and exit and authorizes collection of additional biometrics for non‑exempt travelers, signaling that refusal will generally not be permitted for visa holders, lawful permanent residents, and many temporary entrants ^{[1] [2]}. Agencies justify the expansion as necessary to identify overstays and prevent document fraud, asserting high algorithm accuracy and operational benefits, but the rule’s retention policies—photographs and biometrics stored up to 75 years for noncitizens—raise durable privacy concerns ^{[1] [3]}. Noncitizen travelers therefore should expect mandatory biometric collection in most interactions with CBP starting in late 2025 ^[2].

4. Where TSA and airlines still leave some room — optional domestic uses and enrollment programs

TSA’s automated biometrics for domestic departures and some airline boarding systems are presented as optional and intended to speed processing, with agency spokespeople and reporting in late 2025 reiterating that travelers can decline automated facial‑matching and be processed manually without penalty ^{[5] [7]}. Airlines and airports that deploy facial recognition for boarding or lounges may also offer alternative boarding procedures on request, but practices vary by carrier and port. Opt‑out in TSA contexts exists in policy, but traveler experience depends on clear signage, staff training, and local operational choices, and privacy advocates warn that voluntary systems can still exert pressure to participate because of speed or perceived convenience ^{[7] [5]}.

5. The tradeoffs — accuracy, retention, oversight, and whose agenda is served

Proponents argue the integrated biometric entry‑exit program increases national security, improves identity verification, and reduces fraud; DHS points to high reported algorithmic accuracy and operational efficiencies in its rulemaking ^[1]. Critics and privacy experts flag the long retention windows for noncitizen data, uneven transparency about use and sharing, and potential for mission creep, noting that opt‑out rights for citizens are narrow and inconsistently applied, and that frontline confusion has already produced reported denials or delays ^{[3] [7]}. The policy mix reflects competing agendas: DHS and CBP prioritize immigration enforcement and automation, airlines and TSA emphasize efficiency, while civil‑liberties groups focus on consent, accuracy, and oversight. Travelers’ real choices in 2025 therefore hinge on status and on how faithfully agencies implement the opt‑out procedures they describe ^{[1] [4]}.