Introduction
In 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) uploaded about 920,000 DNA profiles to the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), a figure that dwarfs its previous years of activity.
From a Few Thousand to Hundreds of Thousands: The Numbers Behind the Surge
Before the policy shift, ICE’s internal training slides showed 3,609 samples collected in fiscal year 2020 and 16,392 more by mid‑May 2021. The turning point came after the Department of Justice eliminated the exemption for immigration detainees in December 2020 and ICE issued Directive 10092.1, mandating DNA collection from almost everyone in its custody. By contrast, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) had already sent 1.36 million samples to CODIS between October 2020 and the end of 2024, illustrating the massive scale difference between the two agencies.
High‑Profile Prosecutions Show the Law Is Being Enforced
The case of Hugo Moreno‑Mendez illustrates the new enforcement reality. On March 13, 2025, he arrived at a probation office in Waco, Texas, only to be arrested by ICE officers who repeatedly demanded a cheek swab. After refusing, he was charged with failing to register as a non‑citizen and with refusing to provide DNA—a misdemeanor that ICE previously claimed it had never prosecuted. A magistrate judge found him guilty on August 18, 2025, sentencing him to time served. A second case involved Ronald Genao‑Diaz in Puerto Rico, who was also charged after multiple refusals and ultimately pleaded guilty after a judge found probable cause in May 2025.
CODIS Expansion: A Statistical Explosion
FBI records reveal that the “detainee” sub‑index of CODIS grew to 3,345,692 profiles by December 2025, with 995,000 new entries added that year alone—roughly 2,700 profiles per day. Georgetown Law’s Center on Privacy and Technology estimated that ICE could be responsible for 919,908 of those new profiles, meaning ICE may have contributed almost 90 % of the DHS‑related growth in 2025.
Children in Detention: DNA Collection at Dilley
Congressional oversight visits in May 2026 uncovered that ICE was collecting DNA from families at the Dilley Immigration Processing Center in South Texas. Representatives Joaquín Castro, Greg Stanton, and Nanette Barragán issued a joint statement: “None of the families at Dilley have been convicted of a crime. They do not belong in a database meant for violent criminals, especially children.” DHS responded that DNA could be taken from children as young as 14, but offered no clear explanation of where the samples were sent or how long they would be retained.
Legal Rationale vs. Reality: The Primary Purpose Debate
A May 2021 ICE training slide listed “FUN FACTS” about 69 CODIS hits from samples collected in the previous six months, linking them to crimes ranging from sexual offenses to burglary. An internal email from a deputy ICE official in March 2025 asked for a legal opinion on “DNA testing for family units.” The agency’s Office of the Principal Legal Advisor replied that the primary purpose of the DNA‑collection authority is to build a national DNA database for solving crimes, not merely to confirm identity. This contradicts the Department of Homeland Security’s public claim that the program is an “identification measure akin to fingerprinting.”
Future Outlook: Privacy, Policy, and Potential Reform
Georgetown projects that if the current collection rate continues, DHS will supply more than one‑third of the CODIS index by 2030, a milestone previously expected only by 2034. The Fourth Amendment implications are stark: compelling individuals—many of whom have never been charged with a crime—to surrender their entire genome without suspicion may be unconstitutional, according to scholars like Stevie Glaberson. Ongoing litigation, congressional hearings, and public pressure could force a reevaluation of the policy, especially concerning minors and families.
Conclusion
Seeing nearly a million DNA profiles added in a single year feels like a watershed moment for biometric surveillance. While law‑enforcement agencies tout the crime‑solving potential, the collateral impact on undocumented migrants, children, and civil liberties is profound. As a community of observers, we must keep asking whether the trade‑off between security and privacy is truly justified.
--- *Image Prompt: A stylized DNA double helix floating above a blurred image of a detention facility, no text.* *Image Alt: DNA helix over a detention center background.*