President Ronald Reagan’s White House faced resistance from Secretary of State George Shultz over their plan to subject government officials to polygraph exams in the name of protecting classified data. The White House eventually backed down and limited the tests to suspected espionage cases. Fast forward to the present, where the use of polygraphs has resurfaced in the second Trump administration, leading to concerns about intimidation and leaks.

Attorney Mark Zaid highlighted the weaponization of polygraphs, targeting individuals with no prior polygraph requirements, often for non-classified conversations. Various agencies like the FBI, Pentagon, and Department of Homeland Security have utilized polygraphs to deter leaks, sparking debates over privacy and coercion.

Despite claims of safeguarding government information, the efficacy of polygraphs in detecting lies or spies remains dubious. Historical cases involving CIA officer Aldrich Ames and FBI official Robert Hanssen revealed the limitations of polygraph tests, with reports indicating their ability to evade detection. A 1994 Senate Intelligence Committee report further questioned the reliability of polygraphs.

The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 restricted polygraph use in the public sector, emphasizing the need for caution in relying on this technology. Experts caution against the coercive nature of polygraphs, stressing the importance of skepticism towards emerging technologies like AI-assisted lie detection methods. As the debate continues, the underlying issue remains the potential misuse of polygraphs for intimidation rather than accurate information gathering.