The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is under fire for its rapidly expanding DNA collection program targeting noncitizens, including those not accused of any crime.
A lawsuit filed by immigration and privacy advocacy groups alleges that DHS has stonewalled requests for transparency about the program, which has seen a staggering 5,000% increase in DNA contributions to the FBI’s CODIS database since 2020.
As concerns mount over surveillance, civil liberties, and the potential misuse of sensitive genetic data, this article explores the implications of DHS’s actions, the legal battle for accountability, and why this issue matters to every American.
Table of Contents
What’s Happening with DHS’s DNA Collection?
The DHS, through its agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), has significantly ramped up its DNA collection efforts.
According to a lawsuit filed on June 2, 2025, by the Georgetown Law Center on Privacy & Technology, the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, and Americans for Immigrant Justice, DHS has been collecting DNA from noncitizens—including children—at an unprecedented scale.
The lawsuit claims that since August 2024, these groups have sought details about the program but have been met with resistance from DHS, raising questions about transparency and oversight.
The program’s growth is staggering. Since 2020, DHS has become the largest contributor to the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), a national database used by law enforcement for criminal investigations.
The 5,000% surge in DNA contributions highlights the program’s expansion, but critics argue it lacks proper safeguards, especially since DNA is being collected from individuals who haven’t been charged with crimes.
Why This Matters: Privacy and Civil Liberties at Stake
The collection of DNA is one of the most invasive forms of data gathering, as it reveals deeply personal information about an individual’s genetic makeup, ancestry, and health predispositions.
Stevie Glaberson, director of research and advocacy at the Georgetown Law Center, emphasized that DHS’s actions are “collecting DNA from people accused of no crime” without adequate oversight.
This raises significant ethical and legal concerns, particularly when the data is stored in a national database accessible to law enforcement nationwide.
Privacy advocates warn that this program could set a dangerous precedent.
Daniel Melo, a senior staff attorney at Amica’s Immigration Impact Lab, told NBC News that DNA collection could be used to “map full communities” and build a “web of surveillance” around noncitizens.
Beyond immigration enforcement, the data could be weaponized to intimidate or target individuals perceived as threats by the government.
Emily Tucker, executive director of the Georgetown Law Center, described the program as part of a “massive surveillance dragnet” that affects not just immigrants but potentially all Americans.
The Legal Battle for Transparency
The lawsuit filed by the three advocacy groups seeks to compel DHS to release records about its DNA collection practices.
The plaintiffs have been requesting information since August 2024, during the Biden administration, but claim DHS, ICE, and CBP have failed to provide meaningful responses.
The groups argue that this lack of transparency violates the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and prevents the public from understanding how their government is using sensitive genetic data.
The lawsuit highlights the program’s evolution under different administrations.
A 2005 law, the DNA Fingerprint Act, mandated federal agencies to collect DNA from individuals in custody, including noncitizens.
However, prior to 2020, the Justice Department allowed DHS to limit routine DNA collection.
The Biden administration later enforced stricter compliance with the 2005 law, but reports from whistleblowers and government watchdogs suggest inconsistent implementation.
The Trump administration’s “Securing Our Borders” executive order, signed in 2025, further emphasized full compliance, intensifying DNA collection efforts.
How Did We Get Here? A Brief History
DNA collection by federal agencies isn’t new, but its scope and application have evolved dramatically.
The 2005 DNA Fingerprint Act laid the groundwork for collecting DNA from individuals in federal custody, including noncitizens detained by immigration authorities.
Initially, DHS’s collection was limited, with the Justice Department granting exemptions for routine DNA sampling.
However, changes in policy and technology have led to a massive expansion of the program.
Since 2020, DHS has prioritized DNA collection, driven by advancements in genetic technology and a focus on immigration enforcement.
The Trump administration’s push to use DNA for identifying and arresting immigrants, including minors, has further accelerated the program.
The result is a database that not only serves immigration purposes but also feeds into the FBI’s CODIS, where it can be accessed for criminal investigations unrelated to immigration.
The Role of CODIS in DNA Collection
The FBI’s CODIS database is a powerful tool for law enforcement, allowing agencies to match DNA profiles to solve crimes.
While its primary purpose is to aid criminal investigations, the inclusion of noncitizen DNA collected by DHS raises concerns about scope creep.
Critics argue that individuals who haven’t been charged with crimes shouldn’t have their genetic information stored in a database accessible to police nationwide.
The 5,000% increase in DHS’s contributions to CODIS since 2020 underscores the program’s growth.
This surge has made DHS the database’s largest contributor, surpassing other federal and state agencies.
Without clear guidelines on how this data is used, stored, or shared, advocates fear it could lead to widespread surveillance and profiling.
Privacy Concerns and Potential Misuse
The expansion of DHS’s DNA collection program has sparked alarm among privacy and civil rights groups.
Collecting DNA from noncitizens, particularly those not accused of crimes, raises questions about consent, coercion, and the right to privacy.
Many individuals in immigration custody may not fully understand their rights or the implications of providing a DNA sample.
Moreover, the storage of genetic data in CODIS creates risks of misuse.
DNA profiles could potentially be used to track family members, map communities, or target individuals based on their genetic information.
Melo warned that the program could serve as a testing ground for refining surveillance technologies, which could later be deployed against the broader population.
This fear is compounded by the lack of transparency about how DHS handles and protects the data.
The Broader Implications for All Americans
While DHS’s DNA collection program is framed as an immigration enforcement tool, its implications extend far beyond noncitizens.
Tucker’s statement that the program is a “massive surveillance dragnet” highlights the potential for abuse.
If unchecked, the government’s ability to collect and store genetic data could erode privacy protections for everyone.
The use of immigration authority to justify expansive surveillance programs is particularly concerning.
As Tucker noted, immigration enforcement often operates with minimal oversight, allowing the government to implement policies that might face stricter scrutiny in other contexts.
This lack of accountability could set a precedent for broader surveillance initiatives, affecting citizens and noncitizens alike.
What’s Next for the Lawsuit?
The lawsuit filed by the Georgetown Law Center, Amica Center, and Americans for Immigrant Justice seeks to force DHS to disclose critical details about its DNA collection program.
The plaintiffs are demanding records on the program’s scope, oversight mechanisms, and data-sharing practices.
A successful lawsuit could shed light on how DHS is using genetic information and whether it’s complying with privacy and civil rights protections.
However, the legal battle is likely to face challenges.
DHS’s history of withholding information, as alleged in the lawsuit, suggests that the agency may continue to resist transparency.
The outcome of the case could set an important precedent for government accountability and the protection of personal data.
Public Reaction and Advocacy Efforts
The controversy over DHS’s DNA collection has sparked debate among advocacy groups, legal scholars, and the public.
Posts on X reflect growing concern about government surveillance, with some users calling the program a violation of human rights.
Others argue that DNA collection is a necessary tool for border security and law enforcement.
The polarized nature of the issue underscores the need for clear, factual information about the program’s scope and impact.
Advocacy groups are mobilizing to raise awareness and push for reforms.
The Georgetown Law Center, Amica Center, and Americans for Immigrant Justice are calling for greater transparency and stricter oversight of DNA collection practices.
They argue that the public has a right to know how their government is using sensitive genetic data and whether it’s being protected from misuse.
How You Can Stay Informed
As the lawsuit against DHS unfolds, staying informed about the issue is crucial.
Here are some steps you can take:
Follow the Lawsuit: Monitor updates from the Georgetown Law Center and other plaintiff organizations for developments in the case.
Research Privacy Laws: Learn about the DNA Fingerprint Act and other laws governing federal data collection to understand your rights.
Engage with Advocacy Groups: Support organizations working to protect privacy and civil liberties, such as the Amica Center and Americans for Immigrant Justice.
Stay Updated on X: Follow discussions on X for real-time perspectives and reactions to the issue.
A Call for Transparency and Accountability
The DHS’s DNA collection program represents a significant escalation in government surveillance, with far-reaching implications for privacy and civil liberties.
The lawsuit filed by immigration and privacy advocacy groups highlights the urgent need for transparency about how genetic data is being collected, stored, and used.
As the program continues to expand, the public deserves answers about its scope, oversight, and potential risks.
This issue goes beyond immigration enforcement—it’s about the fundamental right to privacy and the government’s responsibility to protect sensitive personal information.
By demanding accountability, Americans can help ensure that programs like DHS’s DNA collection don’t erode the freedoms and protections we all value.
Stay updated with INUS.
New Minimum Wage In Canada and 5 Provinces, Effective April 1