The Department of Homeland Security has released a proposed regulation that would overhaul how biometrics are collected and used across the US immigration system.
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking would create a far broader biometrics regime than the one currently in place, reaching foreign nationals, US citizens connected with immigration filings and individuals of any age. It would also introduce continuous screening throughout a foreign national’s stay in the United States until naturalization. The proposal is also explicit that biometrics can be used not only for security checks but for identity enrollment, verification and document production.
DHS floated a similar expansion in 2020, which was later withdrawn. The new proposal revives many of those themes but places them within the current administration’s framework for enforcement, benefit integrity and technology use. For practitioners, that history matters because it suggests a sustained policy interest in broader biometrics rather than a short-term experiment.
The proposal does not take effect immediately. DHS is accepting public comments through early January 2026 and will then move to draft a final rule, a process that often takes months.
Current US Biometrics Rules
Under the existing system, biometrics collection is more limited in scope and frequency. USCIS typically requires a foreign national applicant to attend a single biometrics appointment during the processing of an immigration application. The data collected usually consists of fingerprints, a photograph and a signature, which are used for identity verification, background checks and production of secure documents.
Today, biometrics are mostly required from foreign national applicants for benefits such as nonimmigrant changes of status, extensions, green card applications and certain humanitarian filings. Children under 14 are usually exempt. US citizens and lawful permanent residents are generally outside the biometrics requirement unless they fall within narrow statutory or regulatory categories such as particular family-based petitioners.
The standard package is fingerprints, a photograph and a signature captured at a USCIS Application Support Center. That data feeds background security and criminal history checks and drives production of physical documents such as green cards and EADs. The role of biometrics is important but largely tied to a specific filing and stage in the process.
USCIS may reuse biometrics for subsequent filings if the earlier capture is still considered valid and the agency can link the data confidently to the new case. Screening is not continuous. After a benefit is granted, a foreign national is not normally asked to provide fresh biometrics until a new application triggers that requirement. Exemptions for younger children and the limited involvement of US citizens and permanent residents keep the current regime relatively narrow.
Proposed Changes to Biometrics Rules
The NPRM would significantly widen the reach of biometrics within the immigration system. It does so by expanding who can be required to provide biometrics, the types of biometrics that may be taken and the purposes for which the data can be used.
The rule is framed as a system-wide modernization of biometrics for immigration enforcement and benefit processing. It is currently at the proposal stage only. Until DHS issues a final rule, existing biometrics practices remain in place.
1. Universal coverage across immigration filings
Any individual involved in an immigration filing could be required to submit biometrics. The definition of involvement is broad and would cover petitioners, sponsors, authorized signatories, beneficiaries and other individuals whom DHS views as having substantial participation in a request. That language brings US citizens and lawful permanent residents within scope when they are connected with a case, rather than limiting requirements to foreign national applicants.
2. Expanded biometrics modalities and DNA
DHS proposes to move beyond fingerprints and photographs to a wider set of modalities. The rule would authorize collection of palm prints, facial recognition imagery, ocular imagery including iris, retina and sclera images, voice-related identifiers and handwritten signatures. Partial DNA profiles would be permitted, and DHS would have authority to require or accept raw DNA samples or DNA test results to verify claimed or unclaimed familial relationships or biological sex, subject to other applicable laws.
3. Continuous vetting and repeated collection
Foreign nationals who receive an immigration benefit could be subject to periodic biometrics collection and ongoing screening throughout their stay in the United States until they naturalize. That model shifts the focus from a single point-in-time check to repeated checks over the life of the benefit. DHS positions this as a way to detect new derogatory information, maintain accurate identity records and align vetting with the full duration of a person’s presence in the country.
4. Removal of age limits
The proposal removes the current age-based exemptions. Children under 14 could be required to provide biometrics in the same way as adults. That change affects family-based, derivative and humanitarian cases where young children are part of the filing and would require parents and representatives to be ready for appointments and data collection involving minors.
5. New standards for rescheduling and reuse
The standard for rescheduling interviews or a second biometrics appointment would move from good cause to extraordinary circumstances. The regulation does not define that term, which leaves significant discretion with DHS officers. Reuse of biometrics would also be narrowed so that reuse is permitted only where DHS can make a positive biometric match confirming that the new filer is the same individual as in the earlier record.
6. Biometrics on arrest and enforcement uses
DHS would gain explicit authority to collect biometrics from any foreign national on arrest, regardless of age, for the purpose of processing, custody and initiation of removal proceedings. The proposal also confirms that biometrics collected for benefit processing may be used for enforcement and law enforcement purposes to the extent allowed by law, reinforcing the link between benefit adjudication and enforcement activity.
NNU Perspective
Through these proposals, DHS is signaling a move toward a comprehensive, lifecycle approach to identity management. Instead of a single biometrics appointment at the point of filing, biometrics would become a recurring feature of the immigration journey for many people connected with the system.
Impact on Employers
Although the proposal is framed as a system-wide integrity measure, it has direct implications for employers who rely on employment-based immigration routes and who sign or support immigration filings for staff.
Employer representatives who sign petitions such as Forms I-129, I-140 or Supplement J could be required to provide biometrics themselves, even where they are US citizens. That raises questions about who should be designated as signatory, how to record informed consent for biometrics and how to handle staff who are reluctant to provide biometrics for government databases as part of their role.
In-house immigration teams and HR departments may need to revisit who is authorized to sign filings, whether that role sits with a specific officer or rotates and how those responsibilities are reflected in job descriptions and policies. Larger employers may choose to centralize signatory functions to a small group of trained individuals who can manage the biometrics implications as part of their duties.
Sponsored employees and their dependents could face multiple biometrics appointments over time rather than a single visit. That affects onboarding, start dates and travel planning, since many appointments need in-person attendance at a USCIS Application Support Center. Employers will need to allow for appointment lead times, potential clashes with business travel and the possibility of missed appointments if schedules are tight.
Continuous vetting also means that issues can surface mid-employment, not just at filing. New criminal charges, security flags or data mismatches identified through repeated checks could feed into extension adjudications, portability decisions or even enforcement referrals. Employers need to factor that risk into workforce planning for roles that rely heavily on sponsored talent.
In the EB-5 regional center context, the proposal would bring a wider group of individuals into DHS’s biometrics net. People associated with regional centers, new commercial enterprises and job creating entities could be required to provide biometrics and become subject to continuous vetting, even where they are US citizens or permanent residents. That adds a compliance layer for boards, managers and key personnel involved with EB-5 vehicles.
Employers will need to update policies and procedures that support immigration programs. Areas likely to need attention include how the business explains biometrics obligations to staff, how it handles scheduling pressures and missed appointments and how it records that employees and signatories were notified. Privacy and data-protection teams will want to review messaging and documentation because many corporate policies take a more limited view of biometrics than the one now proposed by DHS.
Impact on Individual Applicants
For individual applicants, the proposed rule would turn biometrics from a one-off administrative step into a recurring feature of their immigration journey. The changes touch both foreign nationals and some US citizens connected with filings.
Foreign nationals could be called for biometrics multiple times over the period they hold status in the United States. That may mean repeated attendance at biometrics appointments, tighter timetables and greater consequences if appointments are missed or rescheduled without reasons that DHS accepts as extraordinary. The link between biometrics and continuous vetting also raises the stakes for maintaining a clean record during the entire period of stay, not just at filing points.
Removal of age limits brings children into the biometrics framework. Families pursuing green cards, derivative benefits or humanitarian relief should plan for young children to attend appointments and provide biometrics in whatever form DHS requires. That change can affect how families schedule travel, schooling and other commitments around case timelines.
US citizens and lawful permanent residents who are sponsors, petitioners or otherwise closely associated with immigration filings could now be required to provide biometrics in connection with those cases. For many, that will be a new experience. Advisers will need to explain the link between their role in the filing and DHS’s authority to collect and use their biometrics for both adjudications and enforcement-related purposes.
Day to day, applicants can expect biometrics to become a recurring feature rather than a one-off appointment. Instead of a single visit for each benefit, they may be called in more than once over the life of their status. The range of data collected is likely to broaden too, with greater use of newer modalities and, in some cases, DNA checks to verify relationships. There will be less room to move appointments around, since the bar for rescheduling is being set higher, so missed slots will carry more risk. Continuous background checks mean issues can surface at extension or change-of-status stage even if the original filing was smooth. For families, the fact that children are brought into the biometrics process changes how they plan applications, schooling and travel around case timelines.
Applicants will need to build in more time and attention for biometrics-related steps throughout their immigration timeline, rather than treating the appointment as a one-off box to tick.
Next Steps
The proposal is subject to a 60-day public comment period. DHS will review submissions and may revise elements of the rule before moving to a final version. There is no fixed timetable for that step, but the breadth of the proposal and the privacy questions it raises suggest that the process will attract close scrutiny from stakeholders and potentially from courts once a final rule is issued.
For now, employers and applicants should track the NPRM’s progress and start to think about how their current practices would need to change if the core elements are implemented. The direction of travel is clear. DHS is moving toward a more expansive, continuous and data-rich biometrics regime that reaches beyond foreign national applicants and touches a wider set of individuals linked to the immigration system.
Need Assistance?
If you have any questions about the proposed changes, book a fixed-fee telephone consultation with one our US immigration attorneys.
Author
Founder & Principal Attorney Nita Nicole Upadhye is a recognized leader in the field of US business immigration law, (The Legal 500, Chambers & Partners, Who's Who Legal and AILA) and an experienced and trusted advisor to large multinational corporates through to SMEs. She provides strategic immigration advice and specialist application support to corporations and professionals, entrepreneurs, investors, artists, actors and athletes from across the globe to meet their US-bound talent mobility needs.
Nita is an active public speaker, thought leader, immigration commentator, and immigration policy contributor and regularly hosts training sessions for employers and HR professionals.