DHS can’t create vast DNA database to track ICE critics, lawsuit says
DHS can’t create vast DNA database to track ICE critics, lawsuit says
诉讼称：国土安全部不得建立庞大的 DNA 数据库来追踪移民及海关执法局（ICE）的批评者
Four protesters are suing to stop the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from seizing DNA samples from Americans arrested while peacefully protesting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity. 四名抗议者正在提起诉讼，旨在阻止国土安全部（DHS）和联邦调查局（FBI）从因和平抗议移民及海关执法局（ICE）活动而被捕的美国人身上强行采集 DNA 样本。
In a complaint filed in an Illinois district court on Wednesday, protesters arrested at the Broadview ICE facility during “Operation Midway Blitz”—when thousands of federal agents flooded Chicago—demanded an injunction to stop alleged violations of the First and Fourth Amendments, as well as the Administrative Procedure Act. 在周三向伊利诺伊州地方法院提交的诉状中，在“中途闪电行动”（Operation Midway Blitz，当时数千名联邦特工涌入芝加哥）期间于布罗德维尤（Broadview）ICE 设施被捕的抗议者要求法院发布禁令，以制止针对第一修正案、第四修正案以及《行政程序法》的所谓违宪行为。
They have accused the federal government of “wrongfully arresting peaceful protesters, collecting their DNA, uploading their genetic profiles to government databases, and storing their DNA samples in federal labs—permanently.” 他们指控联邦政府“非法逮捕和平抗议者，采集其 DNA，将他们的基因图谱上传至政府数据库，并将他们的 DNA 样本永久存储在联邦实验室中。”
Out of 92 non-immigration arrests at Broadview, they emphasized, only one protester was convicted. That conviction was based on pleading guilty to concealing a prior felony charge and “had nothing to do with the protests at Broadview,” the protesters said. 他们强调，在布罗德维尤发生的 92 起非移民相关逮捕事件中，只有一名抗议者被定罪。抗议者表示，该定罪是基于当事人承认隐瞒了之前的重罪指控，且“与布罗德维尤的抗议活动毫无关系”。
Among the plaintiffs, two protesters faced minor charges that were quickly dropped—each accused of impeding a federal officer for slapping the agent’s phone from their hand—while the other two were charged with no crimes at all. 在原告中，两名抗议者面临的轻微指控很快被撤销——他们被指控因拍掉联邦特工手中的手机而妨碍公务——而另外两人则根本没有受到任何犯罪指控。
Arguing that federal officials have vastly exceeded their authority, they hope the district court will agree that Supreme Court precedent clashes with the law that agents are using to justify the widespread DNA collection. 他们认为联邦官员已严重越权，并希望地方法院能认同最高法院的先例与特工们用来为大规模 DNA 采集辩护的法律存在冲突。
What did the Supreme Court say?
最高法院怎么说？
In a 2013 case, the Supreme Court held that authorities can collect DNA without violating Fourth Amendment restrictions against unreasonable searches under “one set of circumstances,” protesters alleged. If “an individual has been validly arrested with probable cause for a serious offense,” and that fact has been “confirmed by a judicial officer,” DNA can be collected to identify a person, the Supreme Court ruled. 抗议者称，在 2013 年的一起案件中，最高法院裁定，在“特定情况下”，当局可以在不违反第四修正案关于禁止不合理搜查规定的前提下采集 DNA。最高法院裁定，如果“某人因严重犯罪被合法逮捕且有正当理由”，且该事实已“经司法官员确认”，则可以采集 DNA 以确认身份。
And in that limited scenario—intended to balance rights to privacy with the government’s interest in protecting the public from dangerous criminals—the DNA collected may not be used to extract information about the person’s relatives or health, plaintiffs stressed. It can only be used for identification purposes. 原告强调，在这种旨在平衡隐私权与政府保护公众免受危险罪犯侵害的利益的有限情形下，所采集的 DNA 不得用于提取有关当事人亲属或健康的信息。它只能用于身份识别目的。
“None of these conditions existed when the government collected Plaintiffs’ DNA,” protesters alleged. 抗议者声称：“当政府采集原告的 DNA 时，上述条件均不具备。”
Under Illinois law, the basis for collecting DNA is even stricter, protesters noted. Only people “arrested for first degree murder, home invasion, or sexual assault” can be required to submit DNA samples, and only after a judge or jury reaches an “independent finding of probable cause.” 抗议者指出，根据伊利诺伊州法律，采集 DNA 的依据更为严格。只有“因一级谋杀、入室抢劫或性侵犯而被捕”的人才会被要求提交 DNA 样本，且必须在法官或陪审团做出“独立的合理根据认定”之后方可进行。
But DHS and the FBI have expanded their authority under the DNA Act, systematically working to collect more DNA samples for a software program called the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS). 但国土安全部和联邦调查局扩大了其在《DNA 法案》下的权力，系统性地致力于为名为“综合 DNA 索引系统”（CODIS）的软件程序采集更多的 DNA 样本。
That database was originally approved to make it easier for local, state, and federal cops to coordinate investigations into serious crimes. But Congress amended the law in 2006 to “permit the collection of DNA from any person arrested for any crime, regardless of the seriousness of the crime,” protesters lamented. 该数据库最初获批的目的是为了方便地方、州和联邦警察协调对严重犯罪的调查。但抗议者感叹道，国会在 2006 年修改了该法律，以“允许从任何因任何犯罪被捕的人身上采集 DNA，无论犯罪严重程度如何”。
As the number of people in the database grew, DNA technology has advanced, protesters said, giving cops access to more kinds of biological identifiers. However, the DNA Act was not updated as technology improved, which meant federal officers increasingly got access to more sensitive information than Congress intended, protesters alleged. 抗议者表示，随着数据库中人数的增加，DNA 技术也在进步，这使得警察能够获取更多种类的生物识别信息。然而，随着技术进步，《DNA 法案》并未随之更新，这意味着联邦官员获取了比国会预期更多的敏感信息。
Most distressingly to protesters, there is no way to request the DNA samples’ destruction and the process to get DNA profiles expunged from the database comes with extra costs and could take as long as five years. 最令抗议者感到不安的是，目前没有途径申请销毁 DNA 样本，且从数据库中删除 DNA 图谱的过程不仅需要额外费用，还可能耗时长达五年。
In the meantime, federal agents can access their DNA profiles. And there’s seemingly no way to prevent improper access, since privacy impact assessments that might serve as agencies’ only internal check to reveal civil injustices have been “dismantled,” protesters alleged. 在此期间，联邦特工可以访问他们的 DNA 图谱。抗议者声称，目前似乎没有办法防止不当访问，因为本可作为机构内部审查以揭露民权不公的“隐私影响评估”已被“拆除”。
In 2026, zero assessments have been reported, down from eight in 2025 and “a peak of 24 filings in 2024,” their lawsuit reported. 诉讼报告显示，2026 年报告的评估数量为零，而 2025 年为 8 次，2024 年则达到“24 次的峰值”。
Protesters asked the court to declare that the DNA Act, as applied in their circumstances, is unconstitutional. They’ve also asked the court to order their DNA samples to be destroyed, arguing that “the Constitution does not permit the government to convert participation in a protest into a basis for indefinite access to a person’s most private biological information.” 抗议者请求法院宣布《DNA 法案》在他们的情况下适用时违宪。他们还要求法院下令销毁他们的 DNA 样本，并辩称“宪法不允许政府将参与抗议活动作为无限期获取个人最私密生物信息的理由。”
If left unchecked, the federal government “could create a genetic database of innumerable, lawful protesters by improperly arresting, briefly holding,” then collecting their DNA before releasing them, protesters warned. 抗议者警告称，如果任其发展，联邦政府“可以通过不正当逮捕、短暂拘留，然后在释放前采集 DNA 的方式，建立一个包含无数合法抗议者的基因数据库。”
DNA database fuels mass surveillance
DNA 数据库助长大规模监控
“The government’s actual interest in compelled DNA collection is surveillance, not identification,” protesters alleged. 抗议者声称：“政府强制采集 DNA 的真正目的在于监控，而非身份识别。”
The DNA collection is “one component of a coordinated, rapidly expanding federal surveillance program” that the Trump administration is fueling with a quickly growing army of untrained agents. 这种 DNA 采集是“一个协调一致、迅速扩张的联邦监控计划的组成部分”，特朗普政府正通过一支迅速壮大的未经培训的特工队伍来推动该计划。
In January, ICE announced that it had hired 12,000 officers, more than doubling the number of agents “in less than a year.” Other parts of the surveillance program include a facial recognition app on agents’ phones called Mobile Fortify, which lawmakers have already flagged as unconstitutional. And now there’s a companion app, Mobile Identify, which lets local cops coordinate with ICE officers to identify more suspects. 今年 1 月，ICE 宣布已聘用 12,000 名官员，在“不到一年内”使特工人数增加了一倍多。该监控计划的其他部分包括特工手机上名为“Mobile Fortify”的人脸识别应用程序，立法者已将其标记为违宪。现在还有一个配套应用程序“Mobile Identify”，允许当地警察与 ICE 官员协调以识别更多嫌疑人。
Disturbingly, protesters alleged that the DNA database could tie into “a parallel infrastructure for tracking the physical movements” and political viewpoints of Americans, which DHS allegedly built using location and social media surveillance data. They’re specifically worried that ICE may use their DNA as part of a “comprehensive system for tracking the id…” 令人不安的是，抗议者声称该 DNA 数据库可能与“一个用于追踪美国人身体行踪”和政治观点的平行基础设施挂钩，据称国土安全部利用位置和社交媒体监控数据建立了该系统。他们特别担心 ICE 可能会将他们的 DNA 用作“追踪身份的综合系统”的一部分……