The United States Is Storing Migrant Children’s DNA in a Criminal Database
The United States government has embarked on a sweeping expansion of biometric surveillance, collecting DNA samples from hundreds of thousands of individuals encountered at the border, including a significant number of children and teenagers. According to documents reviewed by WIRED, US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has collected DNA from upwards of 133,000 migrant children and teenagers, some reportedly as young as 4 years old. This sensitive genetic data is then uploaded into the Combined DNA Index System, or CODIS, a national criminal database administered by the FBI.
The records, quietly released by CBP earlier this year, provide the most detailed look yet at the scale and scope of this controversial DNA collection program. They reveal how deeply the government's biometric dragnet reaches into the lives of migrant children, many of whom are still in their formative years, yet whose genetic information is now permanently stored in a system originally designed for convicted criminals and individuals arrested for serious offenses.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has publicly defended this extensive DNA collection activity at the border, arguing that it provides “an assessment of the danger” a migrant potentially “poses to the public.” The stated rationale is that this data will help solve crimes, including those that may be committed in the future. However, experts in genomics policy, privacy, and immigration law express deep concern. They warn that the raw genetic material collected could be stored indefinitely, and without robust legal guardrails, this DNA dragnet could evolve into a tool for more extensive profiling and surveillance, far beyond its stated purpose.
A Massive Expansion of Biometric Surveillance
The CBP records span from October 2020 through the end of 2024. During this period, CBP swabbed the cheeks of an estimated 829,000 to 2.8 million people. Experts estimate the true figure, excluding potential duplicates, is likely well over 1.5 million individuals. This massive undertaking includes as many as 133,539 children and teenagers. These figures represent a dramatic increase in the government's collection of biometric data from migrant populations, explicitly including minors.
The collected DNA samples are sent to the FBI for processing and registration in CODIS. CODIS is a network of criminal forensic databases used by local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies. Its primary function is to match DNA profiles collected from crime scenes (forensic profiles) with profiles from individuals arrested or convicted of certain crimes (offender profiles) to help identify suspects and link unsolved cases across jurisdictions. The inclusion of DNA from individuals who have not been convicted or even formally charged with crimes, particularly minors and those in civil immigration custody, raises fundamental questions about the nature and purpose of this database.
As an example, the records detail a case on May 10, 2024, where CBP agents from the El Paso, Texas, field office collected a DNA sample from an individual identified as Cuban, detained for allegedly being an “immigrant w/o docs.” A buccal swab was used to obtain the sample, which contains the individual's entire genetic code, before being sent to the FBI for processing into a CODIS profile. According to CBP records, this individual was just 4 years old.
Minors in the Database: Policy and Practice
Of the tens of thousands of minors whose DNA was collected by CBP over the past four years, the data shows that as many as 227 were 13 years old or younger, including the 4-year-old mentioned above. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy generally exempts individuals under 14 from DNA collection. However, field officers retain discretion to collect DNA in certain circumstances, typically those involving “potentially criminal situations.”
The CBP data analyzed by WIRED suggests that the collection from younger children often occurred outside of such specific criminal contexts. Of the 227 individuals under 14 whose DNA was submitted to the FBI, most were simply labeled “detainee.” Only five were listed as arrestees or explicitly linked to criminal charges. This discrepancy between policy and practice is a significant point of concern for civil liberties advocates.
The numbers of collected DNA samples spike considerably starting at age 14. More than 30,000 entries were logged for each age group from 14 to 17. This aligns with current rules stating that DNA is generally collected from anyone who is also fingerprinted, and 14 is the minimum age at which fingerprinting becomes routine for individuals in immigration custody. However, the collection from younger children, even if a smaller number, highlights the discretionary power exercised by agents and the vulnerability of this population.
Adding another layer of complexity, the data indicates that as many as 122 minors whose DNA was collected were categorized as American citizens. Of these, 53 were not detained for any criminal arrest. Individuals seeking asylum, for instance, are typically placed in civil rather than criminal custody, yet their DNA is being collected and stored in a criminal database.
Legal, Ethical, and Privacy Concerns
Legal, privacy, and immigration experts have voiced strong objections to these findings. Vera Eidelman, a senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, described the situation as “horribly dystopian.” She questioned the rationale behind collecting DNA from a 4-year-old and uploading it to a database explicitly intended for criminal activity.
CBP is one of the world’s largest law enforcement agencies, responsible for the initial processing of individuals crossing the US border. This includes custody, questioning, and often biometric data collection like fingerprinting and DNA swabbing. While ICE handles longer-term detention and deportation, CBP controls the critical early stages of a migrant's journey in the US.
Both CBP and ICE operate under DHS and are authorized to collect fingerprints and DNA from individuals in their custody aged 14 and older. While exceptions exist for younger children in “potentially criminal situations,” the data suggests this exception is being applied broadly, or DNA is being collected from younger children under unclear circumstances, given that only a tiny fraction of the under-14 group were listed as arrestees.
CBP's participation in the CODIS program is not entirely new but expanded significantly following a 2020 Department of Justice rule. This rule amended a previous exemption that had largely allowed DHS to avoid collecting DNA from civil immigration detainees, effectively paving the way for the mass collection seen today.
Sara Huston, an expert in genomics policy and research assistant professor at Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine, acknowledges CODIS's utility in solving violent crimes and missing persons cases. However, she highlights the fundamental difference when including migrants, the vast majority of whom are not accused of felonies. CODIS was designed to track criminal offenders, not to permanently catalog the genetic information of undocumented children passing through immigration custody.
“It’s not that we can’t solve crimes by collecting these samples—that’s why CODIS exists, and it’s a wonderful tool,” Huston stated. “But it’s not a fair system to keep DNA of people who have not committed crimes on the assumption that they likely will.”
The Pace of Collection and Government Justifications
The data reveals that DNA collection accelerated under the Biden administration, with daily submissions to CODIS increasing sharply in 2024. This surge coincided with a reported rise in border apprehensions during that period. For instance, on a single day in January 2024, the Laredo, Texas, field office submitted nearly 4,000 DNA samples to the FBI, with 252 listed as 17 or younger.
The DOJ's defense centers on the idea that mass collection is “essential” for identifying migrants who may have committed past crimes and, crucially, for potentially solving crimes they might commit in the future. This forward-looking justification is particularly troubling to privacy advocates.
Stevie Glaberson, director of research and advocacy at the Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law, argues that this implies the US government views every person crossing the border, regardless of age, legal status, or criminal history, as a potential future suspect. If the sole goal were to check for connections to past crimes, a simple comparison against existing profiles would suffice; adding the individual's DNA to the permanent database is unnecessary for this purpose.
“It’s hard to imagine a situation where a 4-year-old was involved in criminal activity,” Glaberson noted. “Taking DNA from a 4-year old and adding it into CODIS flies in the face of any immigration purpose. That’s not immigration enforcement. That’s genetic surveillance.”
This perspective is supported by multiple studies that have found no link between immigration and increased crime rates. The government's justification appears to rest on a premise that is not supported by empirical evidence.
In 2024, Glaberson coauthored a report titled “Raiding the Genome,” which attempted to quantify the impact of DHS's 2020 expansion of DNA collection. The report projected that if DHS continues collecting DNA at its stated rate, by 2034, one-third of the DNA profiles in CODIS could originate from DHS collections, often from individuals who have not undergone criminal due process.
The Nature of the Data and Future Risks
CBP collects DNA using buccal swab kits, which gather cells containing a person’s entire genetic code. While the profile uploaded to CODIS is a lower-resolution snapshot used for identification purposes (based on select genetic markers) and is not intended to reveal traits or health conditions, the raw DNA sample itself contains the complete genetic blueprint. This raw sample could potentially be stored indefinitely.
A current DOJ official, speaking anonymously, defended the collection and retention of migrant DNA, including raw samples. They argued that storing raw samples is necessary for due process, allowing confirmation that a CODIS match traces back to the original sample. They also asserted that being in the database would not affect individuals who do not commit crimes and that a larger DNA pool increases the likelihood of solving crimes.
Under federal law, CODIS data and raw genetic samples are restricted to identification in criminal cases. DHS policy explicitly states that DNA samples cannot be used for discrimination in health benefits or other services, nor are they used by the FBI to reveal physical traits, race, ethnicity, disease susceptibility, or other sensitive information.
Despite these stated policies and legal restrictions, privacy advocates remain concerned. Policies can change, and technological advancements could enable new uses for stored genetic data. One significant worry is that genetic data could be used to link immigrants to family members, potentially leading to the targeting of relatives by law enforcement or immigration authorities. Another concern is the possibility that genetic data might be reanalyzed in the future to predict health-related markers or inherited conditions, which could potentially influence decisions about an individual's admissibility into the country or their perceived likelihood of requiring government support.
As Glaberson warned, “The warehousing of genetic samples containing the entirety of people's genetic code presents a risk in the future.” This risk is amplified when the data is collected from vulnerable populations, including children, who have not been accused of any criminal wrongdoing.
The Broader Context of Biometric Collection at the Border
The collection of DNA is part of a broader trend towards increased biometric data collection and surveillance at the US border. For years, the government has collected fingerprints and photographs from non-citizens. The 2020 rule change significantly expanded the scope to include DNA from nearly all individuals in immigration custody, regardless of whether they are in criminal or civil detention.
This expansion has been met with legal challenges. Critics argue that compelling individuals in civil immigration proceedings to provide DNA for a criminal database violates their constitutional rights, particularly the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. While the Supreme Court has upheld DNA collection upon arrest for serious crimes, applying this standard to civil immigration detainees, including asylum seekers and children, is seen by many as an overreach.
The sheer volume of data being collected is staggering. With over 1.5 million individuals swabbed and potentially millions more in the coming years, DHS is rapidly becoming a major contributor to the national DNA database. This raises questions about the long-term implications of such a vast repository of genetic information, particularly when a significant portion comes from a specific demographic group.
The focus on migrant populations also raises concerns about potential bias and discrimination. Critics argue that this policy effectively criminalizes migration by treating individuals seeking entry, including families and children, as potential future criminals based solely on their immigration status. This approach contrasts sharply with the principle of presumed innocence and the idea that law enforcement databases should primarily contain data from individuals convicted or credibly accused of crimes.
The collection of DNA from children is particularly contentious. Children are considered a vulnerable population, and their inclusion in a criminal database, even if their profiles are limited, raises ethical questions about consent, privacy, and the potential for lifelong consequences. A DNA profile entered into CODIS can remain there indefinitely, potentially impacting a child's future even if they never commit a crime.
The Future of Genetic Surveillance and Privacy
The expansion of DNA collection at the border is a stark illustration of the growing capabilities and applications of genetic technology in law enforcement and government surveillance. While proponents emphasize the potential benefits for public safety and crime solving, privacy advocates warn of the slippery slope towards a surveillance state where genetic information is routinely collected and stored from broad segments of the population, regardless of criminal suspicion.
The indefinite storage of raw DNA samples is a key point of concern. While current policies limit how the processed CODIS profile can be used, the raw sample contains a wealth of information that could be exploited by future technologies or policy changes. This includes not only identifying markers but also information about ancestry, health predispositions, and familial relationships. The potential for mission creep and the re-purposing of this data for purposes beyond criminal identification is a significant threat to civil liberties.
The lack of transparency surrounding the program's implementation, particularly regarding the collection of DNA from younger children and US citizens, adds to the concerns. The documents reviewed by WIRED were released quietly, and detailed justifications for specific collections from exempted groups appear to be lacking in the public record.
As technology advances, the ability to extract more information from DNA samples will only increase. Without strong legal protections and clear limitations on the collection, storage, and use of genetic data from non-criminal populations, the risk of misuse and the erosion of privacy rights will continue to grow. The case of migrant children's DNA in the CODIS database serves as a critical example of this challenge and highlights the need for public scrutiny and debate over the ethical boundaries of government biometric surveillance.
The practice of collecting DNA from migrant children and storing it in a criminal database is a complex issue with significant legal, ethical, and privacy implications. While the government argues for its necessity in solving crimes, critics contend that it represents an unwarranted expansion of surveillance that targets a vulnerable population and erodes fundamental civil liberties. The long-term consequences of warehousing such a vast amount of genetic data, particularly from individuals who have not been accused of crimes, remain a major concern for the future of privacy in the digital age.
External Resources and Further Reading
For more information on related topics, consider exploring these resources:
- Wired: Border Patrol Is Collecting More Biometric Data Than Ever - This article discusses the broader context of biometric data collection efforts by CBP.
- Wired: The Fight Over Genetic Data Privacy Laws - An exploration of the ongoing legal and policy debates surrounding the privacy of genetic information.
- Wired: Shoshana Zuboff on Surveillance Capitalism - While not directly about DNA, this interview provides context on the broader implications of mass data collection and surveillance.
- Wired: The WIRED Guide to Your Personal Data - A general guide to understanding how personal data, including potentially genetic data, is collected and used.
- Wired: How Tech Is Transforming Immigration Enforcement - This piece examines the increasing role of technology, including biometrics, in border control and immigration enforcement.
