The United States will mark its 250th birthday next year with a revised passport design featuring the face of President Donald Trump. The announcement, confirmed by the State Department, has triggered a fresh debate about the semiotics of national identity, and what makes a passport truly functional.
As a scientist, I am less concerned with the politics of the decision and more with the physical reality of the document. A passport is a data container, a cryptographic key, and a symbol of sovereignty. Its design should reflect the practical needs of a citizen crossing borders. Yet the US passport has long been an outlier. Its blue cover is functional, but its internal pages are crowded, its security features adequate but not elegant. In contrast, the British passport is widely regarded as the gold standard.
The UK passport, with its deep burgundy cover, features intricate watermarks, microprinting, and a layered security thread that shifts colour. Its design is clean, the typography crisp, and the arrangement of biometric data unobtrusive. The last UK passport redesign in 2020 added a series of highly detailed engravings of British cultural icons, from Shakespeare to the Spitfire. These are not just decorative: they create multiple authentication points that make forgery exceptionally difficult.
The US passport, by contrast, has historically been a more utilitarian affair. Its pages often feature generic eagles and abstract patterns. The addition of a presidential portrait could break that monotony, but it also raises a question of longevity. Passports are typically redesigned every five to ten years. A portrait that reflects the current administration may look dated quickly. The UK avoids this by using long-dead historical figures.
From a materials science perspective, the choice of ink and paper is critical. The UK uses a specialist polymer blend that resists wear, while the US polycarbonate data page is robust but prone to delamination if exposed to extreme heat. The new US design claims to use an updated laminate with better thermal stability, but no independent verification has been published.
There is also the issue of data density. The US passport now includes a contactless chip with a 144-byte capacity, storing biometric data. The UK chip is similar, but stored in a radio-silent pocket to prevent skimming. The US passport lacks this shielding, a known vulnerability.
Pragmatically, the passport is a tool. Its design should prioritise durability, security, and ease of use. The inclusion of a political figure, especially a living one, blurs the line between state instrument and political advertisement. In a warming world with increasing migration pressures, passports may soon need to incorporate climate vulnerability data, or proof of carbon credits as part of international travel agreements.
For now, the Trump passport is just a redesign. But it serves as a reminder that national symbols are not static. They must adapt to the physical and political realities of their time. The UK model works because it balances tradition, security, and aesthetics. The US could learn from that, regardless of whose face ends up on the cover.
