The management of migration in the United States has undergone a "massive paradigm shift" (Miller, 2019) following the events of September 11, transforming the border from a geographic line into a global flow of people and goods. This metamorphosis has given rise to what scholars call a "securocratic war", where national security is intertwined with corporate interests and advanced surveillance techonologies. The deployment of autonomous techonologies (like drones, robots, IA and sensors) and the deletagion of functions to private contractros have created a control ecosystem that defies traditional mechanisms of accountability, transparency and respecto for human rights. In the same line, according to Miller in "Empire of Borders: The Expansion of the U.S Border Arounr the World"
Empire of Borders: The Expansion of the U.S border around the world
To show you about the accountability challenges about this "massive migration program" has in the reality context on the United States of America, we have a couple of arguments to show that position. First at all:
1. Opacity in the "Cyver-Physical Border"
One of the greatest accountability challenges lies in the nature of the "cyber-physical wall". The use of Predator B drones, integrated fixed towers, and motion sensors creates a constant surveillance environment that, while justified under the premise of security, often operates outside of public scrutiny.
- Algorithmic Responsability: The use of autonomous objects like the DOGO robot, capable of being armed with pistols, raises the question of who is responsible for a thecnical error or a lethal execution. When a machine makes decisions based on artificial intelligence, the chain of command is diluted, making it difficult to assign legal responsability for abuses of power.
- Atmospheric Surveillance: As Miller's research indicates, 21st-century state power has become "atmospheric", conditioning daily life through invisible infrastructures. This invisibility prevents citizens and human rights organizations from monitoring the proportionality of the use of force in remote areas.
2. The Security-Industrial Complex: Privatization and Profit
The delegation of border security to private companies like Raytheon or General Robotics introduces a fundamental conflict of interest: profit vs protection of fundamental rights. Migration management has become a "security accelerator" where companies sell solutions tested on international battlefields.
- Corporate Interestes vs Public Good: The business model of these companies depends on the persistence of the migratory "threat". Miller highilghts how former high-level offivials from agencies like the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) often transition to the private sector in security consulting firms, creating a "revolving door" (Miller, 2019) system. This pehnomenon complicates accountability, as a public policies may be influenced by the desire to secure million-dollar contracts rather than seeking humanitarian solutions.
As we have noted, migration management in the United States has undergone a profound transformation driven by the incorporation of technologies such as artificial intelligence, generating "opaque governance" that weakens traditional mechanisms of democratic oversight and challenges the legal frameworks that guarantee the protection of human rights. To demostrate that, we have a couple of two more arguments using a second investigation Inmigration and Human Rights Law Review.
3. Expansion of the Digital Frontier
Chesser (2026), points out that the expansion of the "digital frontier" involves the increasing use of tools such as facial recognition, pedictive analytics, and algorithmic surveillance to identify, track and classify migrants. This allows the government greater efficiency in tis control capabilities, but it also presents an even greater problem due to the lack of transparency in the decision-making criteria of these systems, which can directly affect the lives of migrants.
This phenomenon not only transforms the means of control but also the very nature of migration governance, which was subject to administrative procedures where it was possible to identify those responsible and challenge their decisions. This contrasts significantly with this era of automation, due to a diffuse distribution of responsabilities among government agencies, technology developers and private contractors. As a result, an "accountability gap" emerges when an algorithmic system makes a mistake or produces a discriminatory result, and it is unclear who should be held responsible, thus weakening the right to due process.
Furthermore, the use of AI in migration control poses significant risks to human rights, Chesser (2026) points out these techonologies can reproduce and amplify existing biases, disproportionately affecting certain groups, especially migrants from vulnerable backgrounds. In addition, technology becomes an instrument of power that can exarcebate structural inequalities in the face of mass surveillance, which compromises the right to privacy and creates and environment of constant control.
4. Challenges of Automation
Faced with this problem, the law faces the complex of adapting to a constantly envolving technological environment without sacrificing the fundamental principles that underpin liberal democracies. Therefore, it is essential to declare the operation of the systems they use and the criteria they employ in their decision-making, reducing opacity and facilitating both jidicial and citizen oversight. Furthermore, stricter regulation of the participation of private contractors in migration management is required to clearly define their responsabilities and establish accountability mechanisms that prevent the dilution of responsability between the public and private sectors.
Regarding migration officers, they must be trained and digitally literate, as a proper understanding of how AI works, and the limitations and risks in entails, increases their capacity to make informed decisions. This allows them to challenge border systems and develop independently verifiable technological safeguards, privacy protocols and reliable non-discriminatory implementations to defend migrant´s rights against automated processes. (Chesser, 2026)
In conclusion and given this scenario, the incorporation of automated technology into inmigration control in the United States can offer substantial benefits in efficiency and security, ut it is essential to strengthen its regulation to protect the rights of migrants. This implies not only adapting existing regulations, but also developing new legal frameworks that recognize the specific risks associated with AI and that act with transparency and faimess, balancing technological innovation with the protecion of human dignity.
The Expanding Digital Border: AI, Surveillance, and the Fight for Justice
Chesser, James (2026) "The Expanding Digital Border: AI, Surveillance, and the Fight for Justice," Immigration and Human Rights Law Review: Vol. 7: Iss. 1, Article 2.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/ihrlr/vol7/iss1/2
Empire of Borders: The Expansion of the U.S. Border Around the World.
Miller, T. (2019)
Available at: https://surl.li/tikxgz
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario