Last Updated: May 24, 2018
Update: ICE confirmed publicly in May 2018 that the agency is dropping the machine learning aspect of the planned program, though it is not clear whether several of the other elements remain. For more on the implications of ICE’s announcement and the outstanding questions and concerns, see:
- ICE Backs Down on “Extreme Vetting” Automated Social Media Scanning (Jake Laperruque, Project on Government Oversight, May 23, 2018)
- ICE Finds Out It Can’t Automate Immigration Vetting. Now What? (Natasha Duarte, Center for Democracy & Technology, May 22, 2018)
Background on the ICE Extreme Vetting Initiative:
What is the Extreme Vetting Initiative?
- Pres. Trump’s January 2017 “Muslim ban” executive order called for all travelers to the U.S. to be screened to determine if they would be “positively contributing member[s] of society” and “make contributions to the national interest” – and if they intended to commit a crime or terrorist act.
- The Extreme Vetting Initiative is ICE’s plan to monitor Twitter, Facebook, and the rest of internet to automatically flag people for deportation or visa denial based on the exact criteria from the original Muslim ban. It will function, in effect, as a digital Muslim ban.
- ICE will force its contractor to flag a minimum of 10,000 people a year for deportation investigations and/or visa denial. ICE wants to award the contract for this system by Sept. 2018.
What’s Wrong with the Extreme Vetting Initiative?
- The Extreme Vetting Initiative “is tailor-made for discrimination,” argued The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the NAACP, Color of Change, the Center for Media Justice and 52 other other NGOs in an open letter to DHS. Driven by animus and based on broad, undefined criteria, this tool will let ICE deport or deny admission to whomever it wants.
- The Extreme Vetting Initiative will chill free speech. ICE will continuously scan “media, blogs, public hearings, conferences, academic websites, [and] social media such as Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn.” This will scare Americans and foreign nationals into censoring themselves online.
- The Extreme Vetting Initiative won’t work. According to a letter to DHS signed by 54 of the nation’s leading experts in machine learning and automated decision-making, “no computational methods can provide reliable or objective assessments of the traits that ICE seeks to measure.”
How Will It Impact African Americans, Latinos, and Muslim Americans?
- African Americans. Black youth are more likely than white youth to be on Twitter, and use social media for longer periods. Yet natural language processing appears to be less accurate when analyzing common expressions used in the African American community.
-
Latinos. Millions of Latinos live in “mixed-status” families. Monitoring social media to deport people will sweep up millions of American citizens, a disproportionate number of them Latinos.
-
Muslim Americans. Muslims are disproportionately targeted for watchlisting. This program draws its criteria, verbatim, from the first Muslim ban. It is clearly targeted at the Muslim community.
What Should Be Done About the Extreme Vetting Initiative?
- Congress should press DHS to end the system. The nation’s leading civil rights and technical leaders agree: This system will be inaccurate and biased. It will hurt real people and families.
- Congress should expand its oversight into the system. Momentum is building on the Hill to demand answers and ask DHS to shut down this program, and even more attention is needed.
ICE Documents on the Extreme Vetting Initiative:
In July, ICE held two “industry days” for vendors interested in the Extreme Vetting Initiative contract. The following documents are drawn from the Federal Business Opportunities website for the EVI contract.
-
Extreme Vetting Initiative: Statement of Objectives (SOO) (June 12, 2017)
-
CTCEU Responses to Vendor Questions – Industry Day (July 2017)
-
Industry Day sign-in sheets (July 18, 2017)
-
Industry Day sign-in sheets (July 19, 2017)
-
Q&A Industry Day (July 18, 2017)
-
Q&A Industry Day (July 19, 2017)
-
Q&A from vendor emails (July 27, 2017)
Opposition Letters and Statements:
-
Letter from DHS to Kathleen Rice Detailing the Scope of the ICE Visa Lifecycle Vetting Initiative (April 25, 2018)
-
Thompson, Vela, Rice: Stop Ineffective and Discriminatory Extreme Vetting Program (April 5, 2018)
-
Congressional Black Caucus Calls for DHS to Suspend Extreme Vetting Initiative (March 8, 2018)
-
Joint FOIA Request to the Department of Homeland Security on the ICE Visa Lifecycle Vetting Initiative (March 1, 2018)
-
Letter from DHS In Response to Coalition Letter Opposing the Extreme Vetting Initiative (January 18, 2018)
-
Coalition Letter to DHS Opposing the Extreme Vetting Initiative (November 16, 2017)
-
Technology Experts Letter to DHS Opposing the Extreme Vetting Initiative (November 16, 2017)
Press and Commentary on Extreme Vetting & Social Media Monitoring:
-
ICE Just Abandoned Its Dream of ‘Extreme Vetting’ Software That Could Predict Whether a Foreign Visitor Would Become a Terrorist (Drew Harwell & Nick Miroff, The Washington Post, May 18, 2018)
-
DHS’ Constant Vetting Initiative: a Muslim-Ban by Algorithm (Faiza Patel & Harsha Panduranga, Just Security, March 12, 2018)
-
Why the government should abandon its plan to vet foreigners on Facebook (Rachel Levinson-Waldman, The Washington Post, December 4, 2017)
-
Extreme Digital Vetting of Visitors to the U.S. Moves Forward Under a New Name (George Joseph, ProPublica, November 22, 2017)
-
Extreme Vetting by Algorithm (Faiza Patel, Just Security, November 20, 2017)
-
Using artificial intelligence for 'extreme vetting’? Not on our watch, 50 scientists say (Matt O’Brien (AP), International Business Times, November 17, 2017)
-
Federal 'Extreme Vetting’ Plan Castigated by Tech Experts (Matt O’Brien (AP), The New York Times, November 16, 2017)
-
Federal “extreme vetting” plan castigated by tech experts (Matt O’Brien (AP), The Washington Post, November 16, 2017)
-
ICE’s Extreme Vetting Initiative will be Inaccurate and Biased – and Civil Rights Groups are Speaking Out (Medium, November 16, 2017)
-
Update 2-IBM urged to avoid working on 'extreme vetting’ of U.S. immigrants (Dustin Volz, Business Insider, November 16, 2017)
-
“Extreme Vetting” would be a #PreCrime #DigitalMuslimBan (The Identity Project, November 16, 2017)
-
Tech experts blast Trump’s extreme vetting plan (Morgan Chalfant, The Hill, November 16, 2017)
-
Critics call for Trump to abandon plan for “Extreme Vetting” software (Ina Fried, Axios, November 16, 2017)
-
EFF Urges DHS to Abandon Social Media Surveillance and Automated “Extreme Vetting” of Immigrants (Aleksander “Sasha” Danielyan, Electronic Frontier Foundation, November 16, 2017)
-
More than 50 experts just told DHS that using AI for “extreme vetting” is dangerously misguided (Dave Gershgorn, Quartz, November 16, 2017)
-
AI Experts Say ICE’s Predictive 'Extreme Vetting’ Plan Is 'Tailor-Made for Discrimination’ (Sidney Fussell, Gizmodo, November 16, 2017)
-
Automated “Extreme Vetting” Won’t Work and Will Be Discriminatory (Natasha Duarte, Center for Democracy and Technology, November 16, 2017)
-
Federal Extreme Vetting Plan Castigated By Tech Experts (Matt O’Brien, Associated Press, November 16, 2017)
-
Trump’s “Extreme-Vetting” Software Will Discriminate Against Immigrants “Under A Veneer of Objectivity,” Say Experts (Sam Biddle, The Intercept, November 16, 2017)
-
Rights Groups Pressure IBM to Renounce Interest In Trump’s 'Extreme Vetting,' (Dustin Volz, Reuters, November 16, 2017)
-
Is Silicon Valley Building the Infrastructure for a Police State? (Zach Weissmueller, ReasonTV, November 10, 2017)
-
How ICE Is Using Big Data to Carry Out Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Crusade (George Joseph and Kenneth Lipp, Splinter, August 11, 2017)
-
ICE Wants to Use Predictive Policing Technology for Its “Extreme Vetting” Program (April Glaser, Slate, August 8, 2017)
-
These Are the Technology Firms Lining Up To Build Trump’s “Extreme Vetting” Program (Sam Biddle and Spencer Woodman, The Intercept, August 7, 2017)
Additional Resources on Extreme Vetting & Social Media Monitoring:
- Mixed Messages? The Limits of Automated Social Media Content Analysis (Natasha Duarte, Emma Llanso, Anna Loup, Center for Democracy & Technology, November 28, 2017)
- Extreme Vetting: Myths and Facts (Harsha Panduranga, Faiza Patel, Michael Price, Brennan Center for Justice, October 11, 2017)
- Extreme Vetting and the Muslim Ban (Harsha Panduranga, Faiza Patel, Michael Price, Brennan Center for Justice, October 2, 2017)
- FAQ: U.S. government monitoring of social media (The Identity Project, October 2, 2017)
Chronology of Social Media Monitoring:
Letters to State Department and DHS on Extreme Vetting and Social Media:
- Comments to Department of State Urge Government to Abandon Supplemental Questions for Visa Applicants (October 2, 2017)
- Civil Liberties Coalition Submits Comments on DHS Plan to Collect Travelers’ Social Media Information (October 3, 2016)
- Brennan Center Submits Comments on DHS Plan to Collect Social Media Information Through the Visa Waiver Program (August 22, 2016)
Coalition Letter Signatories:
18 Million Rising
Access Now
Advocacy for Principled Action in Government
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
American Civil Liberties Union
Amnesty International
Asian Americans Advancing Justice
Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law
Center for Constitutional Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology
Center for Media Justice
The Center for Security, Race, and Rights, Rutgers Law School
Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law
Color of Change
Committee to Protect Journalists
The Constitution Project
Council on American-Islamic Relations
The Concerned Archivists Alliance
Defending Rights & Dissent
Demand Progress
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
Free Press
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Government Accountability Project
Government Information Watch
Human Rights Watch
Human Rights Data Analysis Group
Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota
Justice Strategies
The Identity Project
Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
Liberty Coalition
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Legal Aid Justice Center
Muslim Advocates
Muslim Justice League
Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)
NAACP
NAFSA: Association of International Educators
National Hispanic Media Coalition
National Immigration Law Center
National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild
National Iranian American Council (NIAC)
New America’s Open Technology Institute
Online Policy Group
OpenTheGovernment
Open MIC (Open Media and Information Companies Initiative)
PEN America
People for the American Way
Restore the Fourth
South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT)
Southern Poverty Law Center
Services, Immigrant Rights, and Education Network (SIREN)
Union for Reform Judaism
Woodhull Freedom Foundation
Technology Expert Letter Signatories:
Hal Abelson, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Ben Adida, Clever
Blaise Agüera y Arcas, Google / Machine Intelligence
Solon Barocas, Cornell University
Steven M. Bellovin, Columbia University
danah boyd, Microsoft Research / Data & Society
Elizabeth Bradley, University of Colorado, Boulder / Santa Fe Institute
Meredith Broussard, New York University
Emma Brunskill, Stanford University
Carlos Castillo, Universitat Pompeu Fabra
Aaron Clauset, University of Colorado, Boulder
Lorrie Faith Cranor, Carnegie Mellon University
Kate Crawford, AI Now, New York University / Microsoft Research
Hal Daumé III, University of Maryland / Microsoft Research
Fernando Diaz, Spotify
Peter Eckersley, Electronic Frontier Foundation
Michael Ekstrand, Boise State University
David Evans, University of Virginia
Ed Felten, Princeton University
Sorelle Friedler, Haverford College
Timnit Gebru, Microsoft Research
Joe Hall, Center for Democracy & Technology
Brent Hecht, Northwestern University
James Hendler, Rensselaer Polythechnic University
Subbarao Kambhampati, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence / Arizona State University
Joshua A. Kroll, University of California at Berkeley
Been Kim, Google Brain
Susan Landau, Tufts University
Kristian Lum, Human Rights Data Analysis Group
Sascha Meinrath, X-Lab / Penn State University
Alan Mislove, Northeastern University
Margaret Mitchell, Google Research / Machine Intelligence
Deirdre Mulligan, University of California at Berkeley
Cristopher Moore, Santa Fe Institute
Ramez Naam, technologist and author, The Nexus Trilogy
Cathy O’Neil, mathematician and author, Weapons of Math Destruction
Jake Porway, DataKind
Megan Price, Human Rights Data Analysis Group
Gireeja Ranade, Microsoft Research
David Robinson, Upturn
Salvatore Ruggieri, University of Pisa, Italy
Stuart Russell, University of California at Berkeley
Bruce Schneier, Harvard Kennedy School
Cosma Shalizi, Carnegie Mellon University
Julia Stoyanovich, Drexel University
Ashkan Soltani, independent researcher and technologist
Peter Szolovits, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Hanna Wallach, Microsoft Research / University of Massachusetts Amherst
Nicholas Weaver, International Computer Science Institute / University of California at Berkeley
Meredith Whittaker, AI Now, New York University / Google Open Research
Christo Wilson, Northeastern University
Chris Wiggins, Columbia University
David H. Wolpert, Santa Fe Institute
Rebecca Wright, Rutgers University