Whose DNA should be collected?

The Department of Justice’s proposal to collect DNA samples from hundreds of thousands of immigrants in detention centers without their consent has made me rethink the saliva sample I happily sent Ancestry a couple of months ago. Though Ancestry confirmed that my DNA reflects my family’s European heritage, I don’t know what other information Ancestry gleaned, or could glean, from my sample. Nor do I know how this organization that so charmingly celebrates our human diversity plans to protect its information from a government that sees DNA as a tool for its national forensic database linking crimes and potential criminals — a database that, in some dark future, offers the possibility of highlighting in advance those genetically disposed to violence, “sexual deviance,” and other types of criminal behavior.  

I recall my unease when the DNA Identification Act of 1994 authorized the establishment of a national index of DNA identification records. These records were to include swabs from persons convicted of crimes, as well as samples recovered from crime scenes and from unidentified human remains. Although the national index was focused on sexual offenders, it was soon extended to all federal crimes. Unimaginable to me then, in some states individuals are now swabbed after being picked up for something as innocuous as loitering. DNA samples have also been taken not only from those convicted, but from individuals awaiting prosecution, who may never be convicted, and DNA profiles may remain in the national database even after an acquittal — in other words, still guilty so far as the database is concerned.

The Trump administration’s plans for taking DNA samples from immigrants in detention centers have several possible purposes. Most immediately, they will help determine whether the individual has a criminal record, and so discourage the Department of Immigration from allowing him or her to become a legal immigrant in the United States. Ironically, since the administration has criminalized entry into the United States, an individual going through legal channels may already have a “criminal record” if he or she previously entered the U.S. without going through border patrol. More insidiously, by adding all immigrants to the national index of those linked to crimes, the forced samples treat every immigrant as a presumed threat to our security, rather than as an individual escaping poverty and violence or simply seeking a better life.

The collection of DNA samples has been challenged as an illegal search and seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment, which guarantees the constitutional right to privacy to everyone within the United States, regardless of their immigration status. The Fourth Amendment has already been eroded within the 100-mile border zone, where suspicion-less searches are currently allowed, even of American citizens. But the DNA samples — a prime example of suspicion-less searches — constitute one more threat to the privacy rights and civil liberties of immigrants. 

The American Friends Service and the American Civil Liberties Union are among the organizations objecting to Trump’s proposal for taking DNA samples in detention facilities. As both organizations note, the government has often tried to normalize new surveillance technologies by testing them on vulnerable communities and imposing initial restrictions on how any information collected will be used. The government inevitably expands those technologies beyond their original purposes, thus altering the purpose of DNA collection to population surveillance. 

What I find puzzling is how many of the same people who fear the “deep state” are those who support President Trump and his administration’s expansion of federal powers. Perhaps they see proposals like the DNA samples as protecting them from “other people,” outsiders who are not like them. But we ignore at our peril how the same tactics, having been tried out of the public eye on the most vulnerable, can easily be extended to all of us.

 

Carol Ascher, who lives in Sharon, has published seven books of fiction and nonfiction, as well as many essays and stories.

Latest News

In remembrance:
Tim Prentice and the art of making the wind visible
In remembrance: Tim Prentice and the art of making the wind visible
In remembrance: Tim Prentice and the art of making the wind visible

There are artists who make objects, and then there are artists who alter the way we move through the world. Tim Prentice belonged to the latter. The kinetic sculptor, architect and longtime Cornwall resident died in November 2025 at age 95, leaving a legacy of what he called “toys for the wind,” work that did not simply occupy space but activated it, inviting viewers to slow down, look longer and feel more deeply the invisible forces that shape daily life.

Prentice received a master’s degree from the Yale School of Art and Architecture in 1960, where he studied with German-born American artist and educator Josef Albers, taking his course once as an undergraduate and again in graduate school.In “The Air Made Visible,” a 2024 short film by the Vision & Art Project produced by the American Macular Degeneration Fund, a nonprofit organization that documents artists working with vision loss, Prentice spoke of his admiration for Albers’ discipline and his ability to strip away everything but color. He recalled thinking, “If I could do that same thing with motion, I’d have a chance of finding a new form.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Laurie Fendrich and Peter Plagens:
A shared 
life in art 
and love

Laurie Fendrich and Peter Plagens at home in front of one of Plagens’s paintings.

Natalia Zukerman
He taught me jazz, I taught him Mozart.
Laurie Fendrich

For more than four decades, artists Laurie Fendrich and Peter Plagens have built a life together sustained by a shared devotion to painting, writing, teaching, looking, and endless talking about art, about culture, about the world. Their story began in a critique room.

“I came to the Art Institute of Chicago as a visiting instructor doing critiques when Laurie was an MFA candidate,” Plagens recalled.

Keep ReadingShow less
Strategic partnership unites design, architecture and construction

Hyalite Builders is leading the structural rehabilitation of The Stissing Center in Pine Plains.

Provided

For homeowners overwhelmed by juggling designers, architects and contractors, a new Salisbury-based collaboration is offering a one-team approach from concept to construction. Casa Marcelo Interior Design Studio, based in Salisbury, has joined forces with Charles Matz Architect, led by Charles Matz, AIA RIBA, and Hyalite Builders, led by Matt Soleau. The alliance introduces an integrated design-build model that aims to streamline the sometimes-fragmented process of home renovation and new construction.

“The whole thing is based on integrated services,” said Marcelo, founder of Casa Marcelo. “Normally when clients come to us, they are coming to us for design. But there’s also some architecture and construction that needs to happen eventually. So, I thought, why don’t we just partner with people that we know we can work well with together?”

Keep ReadingShow less