CHECKPOINT Act Creates New Border Patrol Office, Mandates Surveillance Tech Transparency—But Funds Zero of It

The newly proposed CHECKPOINT Act is basically a massive administrative overhaul for the Border Patrol’s internal checkpoints, aiming to clean up data quality and tighten oversight. Think of it as the Border Patrol finally hiring a dedicated project manager to manage all those roadside checkpoints you see in the Southwest, but with a hard deadline and zero budget increase.

The New Boss: Centralizing Checkpoint Control

This bill (SEC. 3) creates a brand new office called the Checkpoint Program Management Office (CPMO) inside U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). This office is tasked with standardizing everything—from training protocols to how data is entered. For the Border Patrol, this means less sector-by-sector variation and more centralized quality control. The person running this new office, the Assistant Chief, even has to commit to the job for at least two years. The goal is to fix the issues the Government Accountability Office (GAO) flagged back in 2022 regarding spotty checkpoint oversight.

Everything Must Be Documented

If you work at a checkpoint, prepare for paperwork. Section 5 mandates that the Border Patrol start collecting significantly more detailed data, and they have to do it regularly. We're talking about tracking every single apprehension and seizure—even the small stuff, like seizures involving only trace amounts of marijuana. They also have to log the technology used, details about the people involved, and even how often their drug-sniffing dogs are successful. For the average person, this means that every interaction at a checkpoint, especially those secondary inspections, will now be documented with greater scrutiny using tools like the Border Enforcement Secondary Tool. The idea is to improve accountability, but it definitely increases the administrative load on agents.

The Transparency Clause: Tracking the Tech

One of the most significant parts of this bill is Section 6(c), which tackles the use of surveillance technology. It requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to send Congress an annual, unredacted report listing every piece of surveillance gear CBP owns or uses. For each item—think cameras, sensors, drones—they must detail where they got it, exactly how they’re using it, where the collected data is stored, and the yearly cost of operating the tech. Crucially, they must also include any privacy impact assessments and explain if any were changed or canceled. This is a huge win for transparency, allowing the public (via Congress) to finally get a clear picture of what surveillance tech is being used at the border and how it affects privacy. However, mandating the public disclosure of these specific, unredacted operational details could also create security risks if not handled carefully.

The Catch: No Money, No Sunset

Here’s where things get tricky for the agencies involved. Section 7 explicitly states that no additional funding is provided for this entire Act. The creation of a new office (CPMO), the massive increase in data collection, the specialized training, and the detailed, time-consuming annual reporting on surveillance tech all have to be funded using money already in the budget. For CBP personnel, this means a significant increase in administrative duties without any corresponding increase in staff or resources. This is a classic unfunded mandate, potentially straining existing operations by forcing them to divert funds from other critical areas just to comply.

To top it off, the entire CHECKPOINT Act has a five-year expiration date (SEC. 8). Everything it establishes—the CPMO, the data collection mandates, the reporting requirements—will automatically cease to exist five years after it becomes law. This sunset clause means that while the bill forces immediate, sweeping changes, those changes are temporary, adding an element of uncertainty to long-term planning for border management.