Border expert suggests alternatives to Trump's ‘travel ban’
16 February 2017 13:53 GMT

Former 9/11 commission border counsel and special counsel to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Janice Kephart has said that a ‘travel ban’ section of President Donald Trump’s recent executive order “is unnecessary and discriminatory”.

In a statement, Kephart said that while identity is critical to national and border security, that in reality it is better to plan to minimize the risk of terrorist entry rather than stop it entirely.

“The president's temporary travel ban focusing on specific countries may have been relevant 20 years ago when terrorist activity was more defined and confined, but is just not justified when terrorist activity is often internet-grown, defuse and as worldwide as it is today”, she said.

Kephart recommends instead of a travel ban, that vetting processes designed to facilitate legitimate travel are improved.

Specifically, she suggests merging biometrics into watchlisting and sharing such lists appropriately amongst the military, FBI, intelligence, homeland security communities and appropriate allies, among other enhancements.

Biometric exit should be implementated at U.S. ports of entry, there should be appropriate interviews for visas and admissions and there should also be a USrequirement that all visa waiver countries - and eventually the world - to adopt U.S. biometric pre-clearance, pre-boarding admissions procedures

Last week, Kephart joined forces with biometrics experts Mark Crego to launch a new consultancy which aims to offer guidance for on complex identity issues to the private and public sectors. Identity Strategy Partners will provide strategic vision on complex issues such as biometric immigration exit and homeland security identity management, the new firm noted in a statement.