This essentially gives the government much tighter control of a process that, while decent, has some loose ends in it. For instance, document forging is something that is less effective than it used to be given digital chips and facial recognition.

It is of course legitimate for a democracy to check things like which plants are coming across the border and to deny access or apprehend war criminals and the like. However, the USG does not have a current record of using its powers for good recently. Example: the muslim ban. Anyone who managed to get around that is a hero even if it was illegal because it's an immoral policy.

Tighter control means tighter control of dissent. Want to find that soldier with those leaked documents? Want to locate that journalist with news of unseemly interventions in central America? Want to find those people of the wrong race or religion that are the convenient scapegoat of the moment? Sure, let's make border control more precise. Most people are actually decent and should have default global freedom to move and work by birthright. US border control is about denying people entry, but the main effect is denying ordinary people with a minor effect of deterring crime.