ICE is collecting DNA from detainees for future policing

概览

This episode of Marketplace Tech examines how Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the broader Department of Homeland Security have dramatically expanded DNA collection from people they detain, including undocumented immigrants and asylum seekers.

The discussion centers on a Georgetown Law Center on Privacy and Technology analysis showing that DHS collected DNA from nearly a million people last year and has added about 3.3 million profiles to the FBI’s CODIS database in recent years.

The guest, Stevie Gleiberson, argues that the program raises serious constitutional concerns because DNA is being taken from people without criminal arrests, probable cause, or the safeguards normally associated with compelled genetic collection.

分段落总结

[00:22] DHS Becomes a Major DNA Collector

[事实] Georgetown Law’s Center on Privacy and Technology found that ICE collected DNA from nearly a million people last year. [事实] After a 2020 policy change during the first Trump administration, DHS began ramping up DNA collection from detainees and sending the material to the FBI. [事实] Stevie Gleiberson says DHS now acts as a large-scale DNA collector for the federal government. [事实] DNA profiles created from those samples are added to CODIS, the national criminal policing database.

[01:46] Profiles Are Kept in CODIS

[事实] Gleiberson says the DNA profiles appear to be held in CODIS indefinitely. [事实] She says there is no regular process, as far as her organization can tell, for reviewing and removing those profiles. [推测] The lack of routine removal makes the program especially consequential because a temporary detention can lead to long-term inclusion in a criminal-investigation database.

[02:05] Scale of the Increase

[事实] Before 2020, DHS contributed only very small numbers of DNA profiles to CODIS. [事实] Over about 25 years, CODIS has accumulated roughly 28 million profiles, mostly from criminal policing authorities. [事实] In just a few years, DHS has added 3.3 million people’s DNA to CODIS. [事实] Georgetown’s analysis says profiles from people detained by the federal government were once 0.21% of the database and are now on track to make up one-third by 2030.

[04:37] How the DNA Database Is Used

[事实] CODIS is searched in criminal investigations by policing agencies from the federal level down. [事实] Gleiberson says people whose DNA was taken by DHS may never have been arrested on criminal suspicion. [事实] She says those people, and by association their biological relatives, are placed in what she calls a perpetual genetic lineup. [推测] The concern is not only individual privacy, but also the way genetic data can expose family members who were never detained.

[05:37] Constitutional Concerns

[事实] Gleiberson argues that DHS’s DNA collection program is unconstitutional. [事实] She contrasts the program with Maryland v. King, where DNA collection involved people criminally arrested on probable cause for serious crimes. [事实] In the immigration context, she says the only precondition is that a person be detained, and “detained” lacks a clear definition. [事实] She says lawful asylum applicants who follow the rules to seek refuge are also having their DNA taken. [推测] Her argument depends on the idea that DHS collection lacks the judicial review, probable cause, and criminal-law purpose that supported prior Supreme Court approval of DNA collection.

[07:09] DNA Collection From Children

[事实] Gleiberson says DHS appears to be taking DNA samples from children, including some under age 14. [事实] She says agency policy is supposed to apply only to people 14 and older. [事实] She says DHS records show DNA has been taken from children as young as four, five, or six. [推测] This undercuts the government’s stated limits and raises additional concerns about whether the program is being administered consistently.

[08:13] Legal Challenge

[事实] Gleiberson identifies Briggs v. Mullen as the first court challenge her organization knows of. [事实] The case was brought by U.S. citizens whose DNA was taken by DHS agents in Chicago during Operation Midway Blitz. [事实] The plaintiffs were protesters exercising First Amendment rights and allege that taking their DNA in that circumstance was unconstitutional. [事实] Gleiberson says her organization will be watching the case.

播客点评/总结

This episode is valuable because it turns a technical database issue into a concrete civil-liberties question: who gets placed in a criminal DNA database, under what authority, and for how long.

Its strongest material is the use of scale: the shift from DHS contributing 0.21% of CODIS profiles to potentially one-third by 2030 gives the listener a clear sense of how large the policy change has become.

The episode relies heavily on one expert and one advocacy organization’s analysis, so it does not include a detailed government defense of the program or competing legal interpretation. That limits the range of perspectives presented.

[推测] The episode is best suited for listeners interested in privacy, immigration enforcement, policing databases, biometric surveillance, and constitutional limits on government data collection.