BITMAP Authorization Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. McCaul, Michael T. [R-TX-10]
- Committees
- Homeland Security Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 14, 2026
Bottom line
This bill creates a new Department of Homeland Security program to expand international biometric data sharing and screening efforts to enhance border security and counterterrorism by identifying threats further upstream.
What it actually does
This bill establishes the Biometric Identification Transnational Migration Alert Program (BITMAP) within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), specifically under U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The program aims to address national security, border security, and terrorist threats by coordinating with foreign governments to voluntarily share biometric and biographic information from foreign nationals. It provides partner countries with training and equipment to collect data and compare it against U.S. national security and counter-terrorism databases, with provisions for expunging U.S. citizens' data and a six-year sunset clause.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that BITMAP is a critical tool for national security, enabling the U.S. to identify and interdict potential threats, including terrorists and criminals, before they reach the U.S. border. They contend that proactive international data sharing and screening with partner countries is essential to address transnational migration risks and enhance overall border security, leveraging existing biometric capabilities.
Opponents contend
Opponents might raise concerns about privacy, data security, and the potential for mission creep, arguing that sharing sensitive biometric data with foreign governments could lead to misuse or compromise of personal information. They may also question the effectiveness and oversight of such a program, particularly regarding the accuracy of foreign-collected data and the potential for false positives or the targeting of vulnerable populations.
The bill is concise, allowing for a comprehensive understanding within a reasonable timeframe, making it accessible for informed evaluation.
Section 2(a), adding Section 448(a) to the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
Establishment of the Biometric Identification Transnational Migration Alert Program (BITMAP)
This provision formally establishes the Biometric Identification Transnational Migration Alert Program (BITMAP) within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Its stated purpose is to address and reduce national security, border security, and terrorist threats before they reach the international border of the United States, leveraging existing information sharing authorities.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this formalizes and strengthens a critical program for national security, allowing for proactive threat identification and interdiction far from U.S. borders.
Critics contend
Critics may argue that formalizing such a program without robust oversight mechanisms could lead to overreach or privacy concerns.
Tradeoffs
Balances national security interests with potential privacy implications and the scope of government surveillance.
Section 2(a), adding Section 448(b) to the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
Duties of the Secretary in carrying out BITMAP operations
This section outlines the specific responsibilities of the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), for BITMAP. These duties include coordinating with foreign governments and other federal agencies for voluntary biometric and biographic data sharing, providing training and equipment to partner countries for data collection and comparison against U.S. national security databases (like IDENT, Terrorist Screening Database, NGI, ABIS), and ensuring collected data is incorporated into U.S. Government databases in compliance with the Privacy Act of 1974.
Section 2(a), adding Section 448(c) and (d) to the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
Inter-agency Collaboration and International Agreements for BITMAP
The bill mandates that BITMAP operations include participation from relevant DHS components and requests participation from other federal agencies, allowing for reimbursable or non-reimbursable agreements. Crucially, before initiating BITMAP operations in a new foreign country, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of State, must enter into a formal agreement or arrangement with that country's government. This agreement must outline program goals, training, guidance, best practices for enrollment, and the scope of operations.
Section 2(a), adding Section 448(f) to the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
Expungement of U.S. Citizens' Biometric Data
The bill mandates that any biometric or biographic identification data of United States citizens captured by BITMAP operations must be expunged from all databases to which it was uploaded. An exception is made if such data is retained for specific law enforcement or intelligence purposes.
Section 2(a), adding Section 448(g) to the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
BITMAP Program Sunset
This provision stipulates that the entire Biometric Identification Transnational Migration Alert Program (BITMAP) will terminate six years after the date of the enactment of this section.
Section 2(b) and (c)
Annual Reports and Briefings to Congress
The bill requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit an initial report within 180 days of BITMAP's establishment, and annually for five years thereafter. These reports must detail strategic goals, progress with partner countries, budget information, personnel/equipment support, number of individuals enrolled (disaggregated), training provided, redress processes, and effectiveness. Additionally, within 30 days of each report, the Secretary must brief Congress on enrolled individuals apprehended at the border/interior and asylum claims by enrolled individuals.
Section 2(d)
Government Accountability Office (GAO) Audit
This provision mandates that the Comptroller General of the United States (GAO) conduct an audit analyzing the effectiveness of BITMAP operations within six months of the Act's enactment, and every three years thereafter. The GAO must then submit a report containing the audit results to the relevant House and Senate Homeland Security Committees.
Requires that biometric and biographic identification data collected under BITMAP are incorporated into appropriate United States Government databases in compliance with the Privacy Act of 1974.
Section 2(a), adding Section 448(b)(5)
Why it matters:While standard legislative practice to include compliance mandates, its placement might make it less prominent than the program's operational aspects, potentially leading a casual reader to overlook the specific legal framework governing data handling.
Case for: Supporters argue this ensures that the program adheres to established U.S. privacy laws, providing a legal framework for handling sensitive personal data.
Case against: Critics might argue that simply stating 'compliance' is insufficient without detailing specific privacy impact assessments or robust oversight mechanisms for data handling, especially when dealing with foreign-collected data.
Estimated impact: A foundational legal requirement for data management, impacting the privacy of individuals whose data is collected and processed by the U.S. government.
Allows the Secretary to enter into agreements related to inter-agency participation on a reimbursable or non-reimbursable basis.
Section 2(a), adding Section 448(c)
Why it matters:This is standard administrative language, but it determines how costs are shared or absorbed across federal agencies, which can have significant fiscal implications that are not immediately apparent.
Case for: Proponents argue this provides flexibility for DHS to secure necessary inter-agency support, allowing for efficient resource allocation based on the nature of the collaboration.
Case against: Critics might argue that non-reimbursable agreements could lead to hidden costs for other agencies or an uneven distribution of financial burden without clear accountability, potentially impacting their budgets without direct congressional review.
Estimated impact: Could affect the budgets of participating federal agencies, potentially shifting costs without direct appropriations or explicit line items.
Specifies the U.S. national security, border security, terrorism, immigration, and counter-terrorism databases against which foreign data will be compared, including IDENT, FBI's Terrorist Screening Database, FBI's Next Generation Identification, DoD's ABIS, and any other designated by the Secretary.
Section 2(a), adding Section 448(b)(3)(A)-(E)
Why it matters:These are technical details, but they are crucial for understanding the scope and power of the data matching capabilities, indicating the breadth of U.S. intelligence and law enforcement data being leveraged.
Case for: Supporters emphasize that explicitly listing these databases ensures comprehensive screening against known threat indicators across the U.S. government, maximizing the program's effectiveness in identifying high-risk individuals.
Case against: Opponents might raise concerns about the potential for data errors or false positives when comparing foreign-collected data against such sensitive U.S. databases, and the implications for individuals flagged incorrectly, potentially leading to significant consequences based on imperfect data.
Estimated impact: Directly defines the scope of threat identification and the potential for individuals to be flagged based on matches in these critical databases, impacting national security and individual liberty.