A bipartisan push in Congress is calling for the creation of a federal agency to regulate digital identity systems, at a time of growing concerns over the digital ID push.
Representatives Bill Foster of Illinois and Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania are leading the initiative, which would give the new agency broad authority to certify and audit both the software and hardware used to verify identities online.
Current federal guidance, such as that from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, remains optional.
The proposed agency would go further by establishing rules that digital ID systems must follow. It would serve as an independent authority to evaluate whether a technology is secure enough for government or commercial use, particularly as digital ID tools become more widespread.
Foster, a longtime proponent of government involvement in digital identity policy, has previously introduced versions of the Improving Digital Identity Act. That legislation called for the development of consent-based systems to allow people to confirm their identity online without relying on private platforms or vulnerable credentials.
“The next best thing you can do is provide people with at least the ability to prove they are who they say they are and not a deepfake,” he said last year.
But the push for a national digital identity framework raises serious alarms for privacy advocates who warn that such systems could erode the last vestiges of online anonymity.
By tying identity verification directly to state-issued credentials and biometric data, digital ID programs risk creating a surveillance infrastructure where every online interaction, transaction, or login is linked back to a traceable individual.
This fundamentally changes the nature of the internet, replacing pseudonymous participation with state-verified presence.
Privacy protections promised by digital ID proponents often hinge on enforcement by government agencies that have a long history of overreach.
While lawmakers emphasize that these tools will help curb fraud or impersonation, they rarely address how digital identity mandates could chill free speech.