Increase in DNA Collection Raises Privacy Concerns
In recent years, there has been a significant expansion in DNA collection efforts managed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). This escalation can be traced back to a notable rule change by the Justice Department in April 2020, which revoked a decades-old waiver exempting DHS from DNA collection from immigration detainees. This change effectively enabled large-scale DNA sampling that has since raised alarms regarding privacy and oversight.
The implications of this policy shift were underscored by former FBI Director Christopher Wray during his Senate testimony in 2023. He reported a dramatic increase in DNA submissions to the FBI, which surged from a historical average of several thousand to approximately 92,000 monthly submissions—more than ten times the usual volume. This unprecedented influx has resulted in a backlog of around 650,000 unprocessed DNA kits. Wray emphasized that such an overload could lead to potential lapses in oversight, allowing detained individuals to be released before their DNA could yield crucial investigative information.
The escalation in DNA collection efforts aligns with an executive order reinstated by the Trump administration in January 2025, directing DHS to leverage “any available technologies” for verifying identities and family connections, including genetic testing. Recently, federal officials signaled plans to seek bids for the installation of Rapid DNA machines at local booking facilities nationwide, making available funding of up to $3 million for such initiatives.
Rights advocates are expressing increasing concern over the implications of these practices. Critics such as Anthony Enriquez from Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights have dubbed the current state of affairs a “sweeping genetic surveillance regime.” There are allegations that the practice has transformed into a system that collects DNA from migrants and U.S. citizens alike without adequate transparency or legal safeguards. This raises fundamental questions about data retention and usage, with the potential for misuse in future investigations.
Oversight bodies have not remained silent. By 2021, the DHS Inspector General pointed out the lack of a central governance framework for DNA collection, warning that years of noncompliance could endanger public safety. Concerns were echoed by U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, who questioned the collection of children’s DNA and the procedures for handling improperly obtained samples. He remarked on the troubling possibility that children captured under this initiative could be treated as suspects indefinitely in any future investigations.
Georgetown University’s privacy center has further highlighted the gravity of the situation, noting that once a DNA profile is created and uploaded to the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), the physical DNA sample is kept indefinitely. There currently exists no mechanism to revisit or delete these profiles should the legal basis for detention become questionable. This suggests a troubling shift in the intended use of CODIS, moving from a tool of crime-solving to a mechanism of widespread surveillance.
Moreover, advocacy groups have taken legal action against DHS, seeking transparency over its DNA collection practices and the lack of public understanding regarding how such data is managed once it enters the database. This has prompted a broader dialogue about the implications of these surveillance techniques on civil liberties and individual privacy.
As these developments unfold, a clearer picture of the tactics employed in expanding DHS’s DNA collection practices emerges. Initial access methods to acquire DNA samples, coupled with potential ongoing surveillance tactics, highlight the growing intersection of law enforcement and biometric data collection. These changes raise essential questions for business owners and citizens alike, emphasizing the need for awareness regarding the evolution of cyber policies and the safeguarding of personal data in this increasingly digital landscape.
Engagement with these ongoing developments is critical for understanding how policies surrounding data collection evolve and their implications for privacy in our society. Business owners must remain vigilant as these practices could intersect with their operations and data governance policies moving forward.
