ICE DNA Collection Expansion and CODIS Integration

ICE DNA Collection Surge in 2025

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has dramatically increased the scale of its DNA collection, potentially adding approximately 920,000 genetic profiles to the FBI's Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) in 2025 alone. This surge marks a shift in federal strategy, moving from primarily border-based collection by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to widespread collection from individuals held in ICE custody, many of whom have no criminal convictions.

According to research from Georgetown Law's Center on Privacy and Technology, the "detainee" index of CODIS grew by roughly 995,000 profiles in 2025. While CBP records show they submitted approximately 75,215 profiles that year, the remaining gap suggests ICE is responsible for the vast majority of the new entries. This represents a massive increase from fiscal year 2020, when ICE collected only 3,609 samples.

Legal Basis and the Shift to Criminal Database Integration

The expansion follows a 2020 Department of Justice (DOJ) regulatory change that eliminated exemptions previously allowed for people in immigration custody. In December 2020, ICE issued Directive 10092.1, mandating DNA collection from nearly everyone in its custody, including asylum seekers and refugees.

While the government has defended these measures as administrative identification tools—similar to fingerprinting—internal documents suggest a different primary objective. An internal ICE legal opinion from March 2025 stated that the "primary purpose" of the government's DNA-collection authority is to build "a national DNA database for solving crimes," rather than establishing family relationships or identity.

Prosecution for Refusal of DNA Samples

Historically, ICE indicated that refusing to provide a DNA sample was rarely, if ever, prosecuted. However, 2025 saw a shift toward using criminal charges to compel compliance. Two notable cases include:

  • Hugo Moreno-Mendez: Arrested in Waco, Texas, Moreno-Mendez was charged with a misdemeanor for refusing to provide DNA while in federal custody. He was found guilty in August 2025.
  • Ronald Genao-Diaz: After refusing DNA samples on five separate occasions in Puerto Rico, Genao-Diaz pleaded guilty to refusal and document fraud charges.

Collection from Children and Families

Evidence indicates that DNA collection has extended to children, often without clear explanation to the families involved.

Children Under 14

Despite DHS claims that the program targets individuals 14 and older, CBP records reveal that 492 children under the age of 14 had their DNA sent to the FBI between January 2025 and January 2026. This included 33 seven-year-olds, 32 six-year-olds, and 21 five-year-olds, as well as at least one four-year-old.

Family Detention Centers

Lawmakers and legal counsel for the Flores settlement have reported DNA testing at the Dilley Immigration Processing Center in Texas. Families reported being swabbed without being told the purpose of the testing, with some officials citing "security reasons" or the need to verify paternity, while other reports suggest these profiles were entered into CODIS.

Civil Rights Challenges and Oversight

The program has faced several legal challenges based on Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure:

  • Briggs v. Mullin: Four US citizens sued federal agencies after their DNA was taken following arrests during protests in Broadview, Illinois. The plaintiffs argue that collecting biological data from peaceful protesters violates both the First and Fourth Amendments.
  • George Retes Jr.: An Army veteran alleged that federal agents unlawfully detained him and took a cheek swab without explanation during a raid on a California cannabis farm.

Regarding oversight, DHS Inspector General Joseph Cuffari told Congress in July 2025 that his office was writing a report on the collection of DNA from children. However, subsequent FOIA requests by Georgetown Law found no record of a completed or draft report on the matter.

Community and Expert Perspectives

Discussion surrounding the program highlights a tension between security and privacy. Some argue that DNA collection is a necessary tool for verifying family units and preventing human trafficking. Others view it as an unprecedented expansion of government surveillance.

"The Fourth Amendment categorically prohibits the government from compelling you, without suspicion, to hand over your sensitive information on the speculation that it might be helpful for crime-solving in the future," states Stevie Glaberson, research director at Georgetown Law's Center on Privacy and Technology.

Sources