Biometric Technologies and Congress: Recent Legislation and Open Questions

April 17, 2026

Congress has considered the implications of biometric technologies—specifically facial recognition—in a number of recent legislative provisions.

Key Legislative Provisions

Section 5104 of the FY2021 NDAA (P.L. 116-283) tasks the National AI Advisory Committee with advising the President on whether the use of facial recognition technology by government authorities is taking into account ethical considerations and whether such use should be subject to additional oversight, controls, and limitations.

Section 5708 of the FY2020 NDAA (P.L. 116-92) expresses the sense of Congress that the discriminatory use of facial recognition technologies “is contrary to the values of the United States” and that the U.S. government “should not engage in the sale or transfer of facial recognition technology to any country that is using such technology for the suppression of human rights.” The section also tasks the Director of National Intelligence with submitting to the congressional intelligence committees a report on the intelligence community’s use of facial recognition technologies. Other biometric technologies are not addressed.

Potential Questions for Congress

The Congressional Research Service has identified several areas of ongoing policy concern:

How should the potential national security benefits of biometric technologies be balanced with civil liberties and the requirements of international humanitarian law? What domestic or international limits, if any, should be placed on biometric technologies or biometric data collection?
Are biometric technologies being sufficiently tested to ensure their accuracy and ward against presentation attacks and other countermeasures?
To what extent are potential U.S. adversaries developing biometric technologies? Are U.S. military and intelligence agencies sufficiently addressing the implications of biometric technologies for tradecraft and concepts of operations?

These questions reflect a broader tension inherent in any dual-use technology: the same capabilities that enhance security can, in the wrong hands or under inadequate oversight, become instruments of repression. The legislative record to date addresses only a portion of the biometric technology landscape, leaving significant gaps that future Congresses will likely need to fill.