Recently unearthed government data has revealed that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), through Customs and Border Protection (CBP), has been surreptitiously acquiring DNA from American citizens, including minors, and integrating these samples into a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) crime database. This activity, as outlined by the Georgetown Law’s Center on Privacy & Technology, shows a significant expansion of genetic surveillance that was never legislatively sanctioned for use on citizens, minors, or civil detainees.
Between 2020 and 2024, the CBP collected DNA from approximately 2,000 US citizens, a group that included about 95 minors, some as young as 14. These samples were then sent to the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), an FBI system initially conceived for policing investigations involving crime [read more](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/09/the-dhs-has-been-quietly-harvesting-dna-from-americans-for-years/). Not only does this practice raise significant privacy concerns, but it also includes individuals never charged with or convicted of any crime. In some instances, officials justified the collection under dubious civil penalties as a basis for swabs, which federal law reserves strictly for criminal contexts.
The broader implications of this program are concerning to privacy experts, who suggest it operates outside statutory and oversight boundaries, allowing CBP officers considerable discretion in their decision to capture genetic material. Once in the law enforcement database, individuals may face heightened surveillance and scrutiny by US law enforcement indefinitely. This situation has prompted civil liberties advocates to call for robust oversight and a reassessment of current practices regarding DNA collection.
Importantly, the surveillance framework that allows for this DNA aggregation operates predominantly without Congressional authorization, raising questions about its legal viability. The lack of transparency and public discourse about this practice suggests a need for legislative attention and more stringent regulations to protect citizen privacy while balancing national security needs. The unsettling revelations of these practices have begun to stir concerns among legal professionals and the public alike about the unchecked expansion of surveillance mechanisms.