DHS Move Ahead With Plan To Harvest DNA Samples From Nearly Everyone Detained By ICE And CBP

from the don't-forget-to-pack-your-saliva dept

Looks like everyone roaming across the board is going to become a source of info for the US government. The DHS has already rolled out facial recognition at international airports and additional biometric collections elsewhere. The Fourth Amendment’s near-nonexistence at the border has led to a steadily-increasing number of invasive device searches. Visa applicants and other long-term visitors are being forced to turn over social media information (including passwords) during the application process.

Now, the DHS is hoping to collect DNA from nearly every immigrant it has in custody. The DHS first pitched this idea back in October, hoping to strike the lone exemption keeping it from collecting samples from the hundreds of thousands of people crossing southern borders every year.

The previous administration said it simply wasn’t feasible to collect DNA from every detainee, especially those rounded up near southern borders. This administration says it’s no longer a logistical problem, so it should be allowed to collect it from everyone detained by ICE or the CBP.

[S]ubsequent developments have resulted in fundamental changes in the cost and ease of DNA-sample collection. DNA-sample collection from persons taken into or held in custody is no longer a novelty. Rather, pursuant to the mandate of § 28.12(b), it is now carried out as a routine booking measure, parallel to fingerprinting, by Federal agencies on a government-wide basis.

The rule change removes the logistics exemption, effectively removing the power to make judgment calls on DNA collection from the DHS and placing it in the hands of the Attorney General. Presumably, Bill Barr will be far less likely to exempt any immigrants from this DNA collection, no matter how much of a burden it places on the agencies performing the collection.

The change is now in effect and the DHS is moving forward with its expanded DNA collection.

The U.S. government on Monday launched a pilot program to collect DNA from people in immigration custody and submit it to the FBI, with plans to expand nationwide.

In Detroit, people as young as 14 will be subject to DNA collection.

The information would go into a massive criminal database run by the FBI, where it would be held indefinitely. A memo outlining the program published Monday by the Department of Homeland Security said U.S. citizens and permanent residents holding a “green card” who are detained could be subject to DNA testing, as well as asylum seekers and people entering the country without authorization. Refusing to submit DNA could lead to a misdemeanor criminal charge, the document said.

It will take more than a detention to collect DNA from US persons and lawful permanent residents, so that’s not an entirely accurate synopsis of the DHS’s memo [PDF]. US persons and lawful residents will have to be under arrest or facing criminal charges to be subjected to the DNA collection.

But it does change the scope of the collection, which will now include as many immigrants as possible, even if they’re crossing at heavily-trafficked areas of the border. It also means the DHS is creating additional logistical challenges under the theory that filling an FBI database with non-criminals will make it easier to apprehend criminals.

The DHS expects this to cost an additional $3-5 million a year, including the $5.38 the FBI spends for each DNA kit. Processing is another matter — the DHS did not address this cost in its proposal other than saying the FBI “won’t charge” the DHS for processing. This is an especially meaningless assurance. Taxpayers will still be paying for the gratis processing the FBI will be performing. There will just be less paperwork involved.

Even if it’s cost-effective, it’s still mostly useless. Most of the DNA collected will be linked to people who did nothing more than attempt to cross a border. It puts more needles in the FBI’s haystack under the theory it might result in the occasional apprehension of a dangerous individual. Even the DHS believes the collection won’t do much to ensure the worst of the worst aren’t returned to general population.

The DHS memo acknowledged that the DNA its agents collect may not be immediately useful. Agents plan to take saliva swabs of detained people, then mail them to the FBI. By the time the results are processed, the memo said, the people in question may have already been released, deported or transferred to another federal agency.

Useful or not, the collected DNA belongs to the US government for life. The government has authorized DNA collection on detainees as young as 14 and can hold onto the info indefinitely. In practical terms, this means CBP and ICE will be taking DNA samples from children because agents generally decide how old immigrant minors are, rather than relying on produced documents or statements from detainees and family members. If they really want the sample, they’ll just declare someone to be 14 years old.

Maybe the ultimate goal is to make coming to America just not worth the hassle. The government’s thirst for data is never quenched. Every so often the public may make it take a step back from the fire hose, but it will always come back for more.

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “DHS Move Ahead With Plan To Harvest DNA Samples From Nearly Everyone Detained By ICE And CBP”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
546 Comments

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Worse than that.

Actually, except for when actual spam gets deleted or posts get held for moderation before posting, the people who run Techdirt don’t actually control the flagging-and-hiding-comments system beyond setting the parameters like how many flags are required to hide a comment. On their side, it’s basically all automated.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Worse than that.

Also, that has absolutely nothing to do with the article you’re posting on or the comment you’re replying to at all, you provide no evidence whatsoever to back up your claim, and you’ve already admitted that you’re just trolling. Political incorrectness is one thing, but politically incorrect trolls are a completely different matter.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Worse than that.

From this comment:

Most of the comments I write here are of a fictional nature for my own entertainment. I love to rile the feathers of some of you who are so good at falling for my shit! lol

Most people would consider that the textbook definition of trolling: making stuff up (particularly stuff that you know or believe to be false) to cause offense or “rile feathers” of those who take it seriously for the purpose of your own entertainment, rather than to express a genuine opinion, elicit addition information of interest, express genuine emotions, proffer potential theories or hypotheses, or have a genuine discussion.

Based on this comment, I feel I can safely conclude that the AC I was addressing has effectively admitted to being a troll. It seems pretty straightforward to me, actually. Whether you are that AC, I don’t know. If you are, you must have changed IP addresses between that comment and this one.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Worse than that.

This troll is on his death bed so basically I need the entertainment. I lived long and hard and I cringe at all the panzies comments here as if they had anything of value for lufe. You are laughable so thats why I do it. You are one of the more respectable tders I admit. I am humbled at your civility.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re:

I’m not sure which is more interesting – how naive you have to be to believe that those are the only people being detained, or the implicit assertion that anyone detained must be treated as if they have been found guilty of something without due process.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

"Illegal alien criminal fuckwads don’t deserve “due process”."

Impressive, no only is that directly against your constitution, but you don’t mind the rights of innocent people who sometimes get caught up in this process being arbitrarily removed – some of them US citizens.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
This comment has been deemed funny by the community.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

" Illegal alien criminal fuckwads don’t deserve “due process”. A boot in the ass on the way back across the border is all they deserve."

That’s harsh. I mean sure, the native tribes would like their country back, but deporting everyone descended from immigrants might just be a bit over the top.

But i think we all realized just what sort of troll you were when you started out on how "criminals" didn’t deserve "due process". Because the last guy to openly advocate the "one judge, one bullet" approach in public was Joseph vissarionovich Stalin.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

You have not been in jail recently if you believe that criminals do deserve due process because no one who houses and caretakes the criminal populations in the US believes in due process. Or maybe they would treat their tennants, some awaiting trial, others shredded with bogus convictions by copping pleas, with more dignity and understanding. Even those convicted by a jury of their peers for high crimes and misdemeanors doesn’t always mean they were guilty of anything. Cops will beat the living daylights out of you as their take on due process doesn’t prohibit extreme abuse.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

You have not been in jail recently if you believe that criminals do deserve due process because no one who houses and caretakes the criminal populations in the US believes in due process.

I…I don’t see how the way some assholes treat prisoners in some jails and prisons should determine whether I (or anyone else) think said prisoners deserve due process of the law. Please explain your thinking.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

I was in for twelve days over a small matter where the jailers defied a judge’s order to administer the medicine for my neuropathy in my feet so I could at last sleep at night until I could resolve the matter. They refused the order and I did not sleep one fucking minute in TWELVE DAYS. At which point I was so near death, I copped pleas to shit I was not guilty of just to get out of that fucking jail (and I hope that whole fucking place gets destroyed by a cataclysm like asteroids hitting Jupiter). What they did was destroy my right to due process and they do it every day. They are not Americans.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

Well, what they did was wrong and unlawful—un-American, even—but I don’t think that actually makes them not Americans.

At any rate, whether or not someone gets due process, is legally required to get due process, deserves due process, or should get due process are all very different questions.

Essentially, you’re saying that because some bad actors failed to give you and some other alleged criminals due process (or at least follow the results of that due process), that must mean that criminals don’t deserve due process, and therefore illegal residents/immigrants are not legally required to be given due process. However, the fact is that the first assertion (which I’ll accept as true) doesn’t prove the second or third claims, nor does the second claim prove the third. This is not a valid argument, even if the initial premise (some alleged or convicted criminals are effectively denied due process) is true.

For the record, what happened to you is wrong and terrible, and I can conceive of no lawful or rational basis to justify it. It also helps me understand your bitterness. However, in the end, it doesn’t justify your conclusion.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:6 Re:

You know, I’ve been reading thousands of comments from commenters here at techdirt since it all started in 1999 or close to that. I have seen the results of decisions from governments, corporations, groups and individuals. I have been watching a world full of greed and hostility and sadists and it has just embittered me to the max. All people here don’t have the answers or the where with all to change shit for the better. The assholes with the money and power still fuck with people and the planet to no end. This world sucks. So say what you want about goddamn trolling. Its better than being a panzy ass government licking corporate coddler.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:7 Re:

You misunderstand. There are many tragic tales involving American citizens that happened in America. That is an unfortunate but very true fact. I do not intent to dismiss, minimize, or diminish the genuine harm done to this very unfortunate person.

However, that does not make their tale material to the discussion at hand. Nor does it mean that this is a widespread, systemic issue. This means that, as tragic as this tale is, it does not have any relevance to this discussion and changes none of our arguments. Many people will flag comments that are irrelevant to the conversation unless they are considered humorous and not abusive or spam. I personally did not flag any of these comments, but I understand the rationale for those who did. It’s essentially meant to streamline the comments section. They’re (probably) not saying they can’t be bothered with it, only that this isn’t the place to have that discussion.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:6 Re:

You don’t get it that all these illegal aliens or a lot of them come here to do just that. Tie up our system and game our constitution having entered illegally without even the means to sustain themselves. They are citizens in another country. All they are or should be entitled to is return trip to where they come from. That’s it. They now get fed, vetted and fed, soon their DNA goes into Federal hands. And bam, they’re on the bus back to their country.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:7 Re:

  1. The DNA thing had no logical connection to the rest of that.
  2. We have this thing called “due process”. We have to prove that these are, in fact, illegal aliens first, for one thing. And everyone, here legally or not, is entitled to due process. Period.
  3. The plaintiff offers no evidence in support of their claims, and so they must be disregarded.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:10 Re:

Due process is judicial in nature. Unless they have comitted crimes that they have been charged with, there is no need for judicial review. ICE handles the ‘vetting’ and now soon to be included with that, DNA collection. Illegal aliens are transported back to their country or across the border from where they came. There is no judge involved and no Due Process.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:11 Re:

You have a messed up idea of what due process actually means. You should read up on it at some point.

"ICE handles the ‘vetting’"

So, you’re saying that ICE is OK to violate the due process rights of everybody they come across up until they decide whether the people they’ve locked up deserve to be there, no legal representation required?

"Illegal aliens are transported back"

OK, so what about the rights of the people who AREN’T illegal aliens but still had their rights violated by your gestapo cosplayers? You don’t see a slight problem there?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:12 Re:

That is all determined in the vetting process. If they want to immigrate and meet requirements then they will be held oand go through immigration process. If they have committed crimes they will get their due process. If they are deemed enemy combatants they will be detained and held according to Geneva Convention. That is my understanding of what is happening.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:11 Re:

You seem confused about “due process”. It actually varies quite a bit, and it can include purely administrative procedures, too. A judge is not required for something to be “due process”. Additionally, there is absolutely nothing in the law restricting due process to criminal cases. For one, civil lawsuits also involve both due process and (generally) judicial review.

And again, that doesn’t justify the mass collection of DNA from illegal aliens. That part does require additional due process beyond simply being an illegal alien, or at least that’s the argument here, which you haven’t actually refuted.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:12 Re:

There is going to be a new US identification taking place and all US citizens are going to be forced into giving DNA. But first there will be a new ID Card given this year I believe it is "True ID." At some point following a global clamp down for some catastrophe or cataclysm, maybe the CoronaVirus, maybe some act of war or maybe they will flipflop the magnetosphere over the planet (again) only this time during a huge coronal mass ejection, the US is going to start implanting chips into the hand of every citizen. It is going to be the mark of the beast. Woe is that day people.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:9 Re:

I’m sick and tired of repeating this: due process is not restricted to criminal charges. It is also not restricted to judicial review (for example, there’s also mediation). Also, as I recall, accused aliens can appeal for judicial review of a deportation order, so there’s some more due process for ya.

Additionally, you keep slipping in that DNA collection as part and parcel of deporting illegal immigrants without any evidence or even explanation as to why that would be necessary or useful without something beyond being an illegal alien. The argument is that that is a separate issue that must go through it’s own due process, not automatically apply to every illegal alien. You have offered absolutely nothing to even attempt to refute that.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:9 Re:

“Immigration” is a very broad term that says essentially nothing about intent or legality (aside from it being long-term rather than temporary like a vacation). It has no real connotation to it, good or bad.

“Invader” specifically means that the person in question has ill intent for the destination country that will likely involve unlawful behavior. It has a very negative connotation.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:10 Re:

Immigration is immigration. People coming to America to immigrate means they come to stay. There are tests and a regiment of duties to do that. I don’t make decisions of who are immigrants and who are illegal aliens. I trust that the government through their vetting process can determine who is who and who has come here to harm Americans. That’s a big trust. But, when this government just opens the gates to undocumented refugees and they flood into sanctuary cities, I have a huge problem with that.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:11 Re:

"People coming to America to immigrate means they come to stay"

Then why do people coming on temporary work visas or study programs also have to go through immigration checks?

"I trust that the government through their vetting process"

Because we all know that the government never makes mistakes and never abuses power?

"But, when this government just opens the gates to undocumented refugees and they flood into sanctuary cities, I have a huge problem with that."

Good thing that isn’t happening and nobody’s advocating for open borders, then? Also, I’d read p on what a "sanctuary city" actually means. It’s generally not what the xenophobic right wing echo chambers want you to this it means.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:14 Re:

Unless I’m mistaken, the term "sanctuary city" simply means that the local government refuse to do the work of the federal government for them for free, and insist that undocumented immigrants have to be dealt with on a federal level.

The amount of stories the right-wing fiction writers have spun this in to is rather amazing, though it does help to identify the uninformed when they start parroting such things.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:11 Re:

You haven’t directly stated that, but you do play the role of the guy paranoid about people invading the southern border without understanding context or meaning of the data. People like that are usually the ones who would happily attack a 3rd generation Latino immigrant based on how he looks before they’d even question the legality of a Swedish guy who’s been living illegally for a decade.

I might be mistaken, but usually people who talk about "invaders’" are thinking about a particular skin tone.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:12 Re:

You are playing the role of the extremist here, not I. What makes you think my concerns rise out of paranoia for one? And what makes you think I have one ounce of prejudice against anyone, third generation or whatever coming to us from any border? I have been friends with seasonal harvesters from Mexico coming to California for a long time. I built some houses with some in the eighties. Those guys I trusted with my life. Its really this government wanting to open the borders to allow a flood of ‘refugees’ that I oppose. Only because they were coming in and not being vetted or identified as to who they actually were. We knew nothing about them, only what they told us.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:13 Re:

"What makes you think my concerns rise out of paranoia for one?"

You keep talking about "invasion"?

"And what makes you think I have one ounce of prejudice against anyone, third generation or whatever coming to us from any border? "

I didn’t say that you did, only that you repeatedly parrot the talking points of those who do.

"Those guys I trusted with my life"

So, what makes them different from the current people doing the same.

"Its really this government wanting to open the borders to allow a flood of ‘refugees’ that I oppose"

You’re opposing a xenophobic fantasy, and you seem dead set on pretending that there’s no such thing as a genuine refugee for some reason.

"We knew nothing about them, only what they told us."

So, when someone is fleeing rape and murder (often caused by the foreign policy of the US), which documentation do you believe they should make sure they have handy?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

"You have not been in jail recently if you believe that criminals do deserve due process…"

That is correct. I don’t think that being in one – either as inmate or warden – would change my mind even if, as you describe, the prisons happen to be run by worse people than the normal inmates.

You are not describing law enforcement in a first world country. You’re describing a gang of thugs in a warlord dictatorship.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

bob says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

When you repeatedly do something, even for giggles, there is a point where it is no longer distinguishable between acting and reality.

So you may try to retreat from all the bull crap you posted already with your excuse of "I was just joking/trolling". But we already know it’s not funny and that you have serious problems in your life. Because no amount of trolling is going to replace whatever you are missing so that you can mature emotionally, physically, mentally, or socially into a well adjusted human.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

"You have not been in jail recently if you believe that criminals do deserve due process"

Two things to take away from this:

  1. You imply you’ve been to jail recently.
  2. Despite having had your due process rights honoured but still found guilty, you ended up spending time with people you didn’t like. Therefore, this is a reason to remove the due process rights from people who have not been convicted of any crime.

Neither of these present a positive view of you.

"Even those convicted by a jury of their peers for high crimes and misdemeanors doesn’t always mean they were guilty of anything"

Which is a very good reason to retain the right to due process to minimise the number of people this happens to, right?

"Cops will beat the living daylights out of you as their take on due process doesn’t prohibit extreme abuse."

In a civilised country, the right of due process includes the right to avoid extrajudicial punishment prior to conviction and the right to redress should those people abuse their power.

Are you saying that the US is not a civilised country?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

Absolutely the US is not a civilized country. It is as bad as any other. It hides behind its broken judicial system to pretend to appear as if they are civilized. Most recently although there have been others like it, take Epstein murder. The people in high positions in the government are not civilized. They only push that malarky so that most people don’t become like they are and are subdued only by the goodness in them and fear of winding up behind bars or worse. Look at the incivility here at techdirt. Some of your attacks on commenters are vicious. ????

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:6 Re:

I did not admit to being a troll. I am as much if not more a human being than anyone here. I have a beautifully rich past experience of life. I am well educated also. I am not trying to make enemies, but because I feel strongly about some things in life, you call me a troll. If that rocks your boat, oh well.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:7 Re:

I’ve already addressed that “not admitting to being a troll” elsewhere. Suffice to say that you admitted to having motives that define a troll. You said that your posts are often motivated solely by the entertainment you get from the reactions from others who disagree with the points you bring up rather than to have a discussion. That is textbook trolling. Additionally, absolutely nothing says a troll can’t be a well-educated human with rich experiences and strong feelings about some things, so none of that refutes what I said.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:8 Re:

I admit sometimes I interject sauce to stir up techdirt’s brew! But, damn, When Stone comes out and bites the hook, I get a good laugh sometime! Give an ol guy a break! Ive been thru shit you wouldn’t believe. Im tired sometime I need a good laugh. But, I am dead serious on other matters. I know some things.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

Extrajudicial punishment! taboo! you are reading that from a book? Go have the cops called on you for doing absolutely nothing wrong and go to jail and kiss up the fucking corrupt judicial ststem and come back with your report after you are tortured for twelve days from total sleep deprivation by a jail system that defies court orders and denies your due process until you are on the brink of death so you cop a plea so you can finally fall to sleep, also for which it has completely changed me as I never fully recovered from that trauma.. and then come back here to techdirt with your report. Id like to read it PaulT.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Again, until they have been proven to be illegal aliens, they haven’t been proven to be guilty of a crime, and they should be given the same constitutional rights we give everyone accused of a crime in the United States. (And BTW, except the right to vote or right to hold office, our constitutional rights apply to nonresidents and noncitizens, not just citizens or legal residents.)

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

I am spot on telling the truth about my experience, but do you see how aliens from outside our country game the system here in the US? We can’t take in everyone who wants to come here. It would further destroy our country. Growth rates would be off the charts. Our very means to live would become unsustainable. Costs would rise beyond our means. Our government has to be wise enough to see that an exodus will cripple our country. It will cripple the courts and our economy.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

I never stated any of what you are stating. I said the jailers destroyed my due process, but never said others didn’t deserve it. I said aliens whose only crime is being in this country illegally and undocumented only get a free ride back to their country. If they have committed crimes while being here, then they are going up on charges then they have due process.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

"I said aliens whose only crime is being in this country illegally and undocumented only get a free ride back to their country."

OK, so they deserve due process while that status is being determined and the appropriate punishment applied, right?

"If they have committed crimes while being here, then they are going up on charges then they have due process."

You have that backwards. Due process should apply before the charges are filed, as should the presumption of innocence before guilt is proven – something which you omit in your statement here.

Remember – it’s not just criminals who deserve due process. It’s also the innocent people who get caught up in this dragnet.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

Not my intention but you have taken out of context my whole rant. I meant that the private jailing system has destroyed Due Process. I even told them I couldn’t believe I was talking to Americans because of their cruelty and absolute disdain and indifference. It was fucking atrocious. In the revered words of Mike tyson, That’s Ludimacrous!

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

"The vetting process is how you find out who is an alien without documentation"

…and the people you are "vetting" have rights, and abiding by those rights is part of due process.

"The agencies that catch these people crossing over the border into US sends them back with a sandwich."

So, we’re hallucinating those camps? OK…

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Look, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled on this contrary to your assertion multiple times between the 19th century and more recent times, the language of the Constitution that guarantees due process includes no such limitations, the Geneva Convention does give even known enemy combatants basic human rights, and there is no indication that even one of the persons being detained are suspected to be enemy combatants. We even gave Saddam Hussein and terrorists who plotted 9/11 (and some other acts of terrorism on US soil) at least some due process, you know. And yet you can’t give the same rights to any person detained as an unlawful resident/immigrant because it’s hypothetically possible that some of them might be suspected by someone of possibly being an enemy combatant? Seriously?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

Due process isn’t just for those charged with committing a crime but those charged with any unlawful behavior. That includes illegal immigration or illegal residency. They are being charged with being in the country unlawfully, and that warrants due process. Also, collecting DNA from anyone requires some level of due process (like a warrant).

Again, “due process” must be given for any charge, criminal or not, or to deprive people of any rights.

Scary Devil Monastery (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

"Not an excuse. Even people shipped off to Guantanamo Bay had at least some semblance of due process afforded to them."

Granted, in many cases that "process" was revealed to be a bunch of Afghani thugs beating some old icecream vendor in kabul unconscious and selling him to a squad of american troops as "Usama Bin Laden’s personal driver".

But at least there was a process, even if it relied extensively on what american troops got told by opportunistic afghanistan slavers.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Norahc (profile) says:

Re: Re:

"How could we not?"

Do you honestly trust our government to stop there? Next will be DNA tests collected roadside during a traffic stop.

But what purpose does this DNA collection really serve? It can’t be used to prevent people previously deported from re-entering the country, because even DHS admits the results may not be back in time.

Or is the purpose to gradually condition our society into accepting gradually increasing levels of government surveillance and intrusion that make Orwell’s 1984 pale by comparison? Make no mistake…our government would collect biometric information on every person in this country if they thought they could get away with it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5

Not an answer to the question. How many generations count, in your view?

Also: Passports can be faked, and both the pledge of allegiance and the singing of the national anthem are shitty tradition we think of as “patriotic” because we were told to think of it that way. Pledging loyalty to a flag¹ or singing a song isn’t patriotism. Patriotism is someone asking if, and why, they even need to do those things in the first place.


¹ — And so you get a further bug up your ass about my comment, allow me to present an alternate pledge that isn’t a loyalty oath to the government: “I pledge allegiance to the people of the United States of America, and to the Republic in which they live — one nation, and its Constitution, working towards liberty and justice for all.”

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Norahc (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Who cares? My DNA is even more American than yours. I’m not worried. You worried?

Pretty much anyone who cares about the Constitution cares about government overreach like this.

And I’m absolutely worried about when our government decides this is not enough information for them and decide to collect the DNA of everyone.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Norahc (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

Well, we’ve got to do something to identify and deport the 25 million illegal alien fuckwads squatting in the USA.

And how is DNA collection going to accomplish that?

You have a better idea?

Start by remembering this country was founded on immigration.

Then we can work on streamlining and improving the immigration process in ways that don’t treat our Constitution like toilet paper.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

Well, you also say someone should get out of the country for being a half-breed Native American. So maybe you’re just racist against red people, not brown? Or is it mixed ancestry that bothers you?

But let’s look at this logically. You are okay with taking the DNA of someone accused of entering or staying in the country illegally. You don’t explain what that would prove, especially given the fact that most citizens and legal residents are not having their DNA sampled for the database, so it can’t be used to prove or disprove whether or not they were born to American citizens or legal residents. It might be usable to test ethnicity, but only a racist would care about that in regards to criminals.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

Heh. Brown people that’s small thinking.

Slaves that want to be slaves. Morality and ethics, you define, blindly supported by all as if it were their own. Instant and total blacklisting of any unperson by everyone at the push of a button. Enemies on the battlefield one second, converted to your most loyal followers the next.

Why convince people your opinion is the correct one when you can just make your opinion the only one they know with a vigorous passion to defend?

Now that’s where the real money is. Just stop looking at them as people. They’re programmable meat sacks. They just don’t realize it yet, and by the time they figure it out, it will be too late for them to do anything about it.

Rights? Heh. If you think any of those powers that be give a rat’s ass about your so called "rights" you haven’t been paying attention. The only "right" they care about is the one enforced by their own power. If they think they can get away with taking away those "rights" they will. The real thing you should be worried about is how much longer you have left to worry about it. Because if they could take away your free will, if they could force-ably mold you into the being they want you to be, they would without a second thought. Rights are meaningless. The only thing these people understand is power, and those proclaiming "Rights!" do not have the power needed to challenge them. But feel free to continue making such sarcastic claims, you’re a wonderful addition to the performance they need to continue unopposed.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

I fought hard in respect to the Constitution. Am I not entitled to feel safe in my own country and from kooky politicians opening the border gates to every tomas dick and haraldo? That at some point will be detrimental to my country’s own economy. Where will it end? People getting raped in broad daylight as in Europe? I have a right to not want this influx of whoever the hell they are.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

Again, none of us are advocating for open borders. Nor are any of the politicians in America that I’m aware of. We’re just saying that immigrants (illegal or otherwise) also have rights. That is not at all advocating for open borders.

You also don’t have an inherent right to feel safe if that infringes on others’ rights. Even illegal aliens have a right to due process before being deported, as guaranteed by that Constitution you respect.

As for the stuff about the economy and people being raped, a) [citation needed], and b) the issue is what the law is, not what you think the law should be, and the law is that illegal aliens have rights, too. Any detriment their presence may have is immaterial to what rights they have.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

"Am I not entitled to feel safe in my own country"

In my experience, the reason why you feel unsafe probably has more to do with what Fox News are telling you to think that any reality on the streets where you live.

"That at some point will be detrimental to my country’s own economy"

Actual studies show that immigration is a net positive for the country.

"People getting raped in broad daylight as in Europe?"

Yeah, people who get lied to all the time do think that’s a common occurence.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

But is she hot? Is her private place special? Does she howl like a dog and hiss like a snake? That’s what everyone says about hot and horny Indian babes.

Is it true?

Or is she another disgusting drunk trailer trash whore with moccasins?

Not her country anymore, she sold it for some whiskey, as I remember.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:7 Re:

"Go find another country "

I love the fact that this is your response to someone telling you that their family were here before you were. The fact that you can’t identify the correct person to attack is the icing on the cake, but the lack of self-awareness is impressive.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:9 Re:

"Their dead family."

Their lineage is still there, and likely outlasts your family by many generations. Which, by your logic, makes them more American than you.

"May it’s their country , by your reasoning."

Hey, you’re the one claiming that new immigrants need to get kicked out so that the descendants of the last set of immigrants feel safer. We’re just pointing out that at one point your family were the "invaders".

Scary Devil Monastery (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:9 Re:

"Now we know what the DNA screening is about; 100% Anglo or Nordic or GTFO."

That’s going to suck for quite a few very surprised good ole boys in good standing with the KKK…

https://www.statnews.com/2017/08/16/white-nationalists-genetic-ancestry-test/

"…It was a strange moment of triumph against racism: The gun-slinging white supremacist Craig Cobb, dressed up for daytime TV in a dark suit and red tie, hearing that his DNA testing revealed his ancestry to be only “86 percent European, and … 14 percent Sub-Saharan African."

That said using DNA to screen for "ethnic" markers is a finicky and highly error-prone business to begin with. It’s at best a "best guess" approach.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

"Who cares? My DNA is even more American than yours. I’m not worried. You worried?"

American: Refers to inhabitants of both north and south american continents

How can one have dna that is more this or that country? Seems it is just another tool in the bigot toolbox.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Scary Devil Monastery (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

"Well, there are some well documented American families, DNA and much more."

So in other words, aside from people who have the genetic markers indicating descent from JFK and a few others, the rest should get themselves out of the US?

This may just be the most backward suggestion for the use of the long-buried pseudoscience of eugenics I’ve seen in a while.
At this point I’m fairly sure we’re talking to a troll. No one is that dumb.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:10

Good idea for the rest of us law abiding Americans.

For what reason should “law abiding Americans” have their DNA collected and stored by the government? Because if you think DNA collection would stop with undocumented immigrants, you’re a bigger fool than you’ve already proven yourself to be.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:13 Re:

The purity of the DNA is the reason. It is completely possible to forecast what diseases different people will be proned to. For Law Enforcement, its about precrime. Which people will be prone to mental disturbances etc… As well as investigative evidence at the scenes of crimes.

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:14 Re:

First, that is an infringement of people’s rights against unreasonable search and seizure to do that sort of precrime thing.

Second, there is no evidence that people “prone to mental disturbances” are any more likely to commit crimes than anyone else.

Third, a lot of mental illnesses have no known genetic component, and even among those we do, we generally don’t know how to pinpoint those from genetic code alone. Same goes with a lot of physical ailments.

Fourth, that is a violation of people’s medical privacy.

Fifth, what in the world do you mean by the “purity of DNA”?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:10 Re:

Another American tenet is "innocent until proven guilty". Are you suggesting we put all of those alleged illegal immigrants on trial before we collect their DNA? After all, they’re not criminals until proven so in a court of law.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:11 Re:

Illegal aliens are not protected by the rights within the Constitution. They represent a national security risk and are not innocent at all by the fact they are standing inside the border of America with no legal right to be here. They have no legal documents that allow them sanctuary as noncitizens. They are not even represented by a legal system. It is that way all around the world. Get over it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:12 Re:

Alphabet agencies, undemocratic agencies being run by unelected have been writing illegal laws since the mid eighties after Chevron vs EPA. They are going to write this illegal alien DNA collection law and it will be illegal, but it will be on the books. What is anyone going to do about it?

bob says:

Re: Re: Re:13 Re:

What is anyone going to do about it?

The only reasons executive branch agencies get away with writing illegal policies is that the head of the executive branch lets it happen and the majority in the senate and/or congress either abdicated their own constitutional powers or wrote badly worded laws.

Guess who has power to put those terrible politicians into power?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:12

Yeah, uh, you might want to read up on the Constitution and the jurisprudence surrounding the subject of undocumented immigrants and constitutional rights. For starters, read this part of the 14th Amendment:

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now, can you pick out the two words that provide legal protections to undocumented immigrants? I can: “any person”. (I bet you’ll come to hate those two words.)

And the Supreme Court tends to agree. It ruled in Zadvydas v. Davis that “due process” (another couple of words you seem to hate!) of the 14th Amendment applies to every non-citizen in the United States even if their presence may be, or is, “unlawful, involuntary, or transitory”. It ruled as follows in Plyler v. Doe:

The illegal aliens who are … challenging the state may claim the benefit of the Equal Protection clause which provides that no state shall ‘deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.’ Whatever his status under immigration laws, an alien is a ‘person’ in any ordinary sense of the term … the undocumented status of these children does not establish a sufficient rational basis for denying benefits that the state affords other residents.

And in Wong Win v. United States (a case from 1896!), the Supreme Court ruled as follows:

[A]ll persons within the territory of the United States are entitled to the protection by [the Fifth and Sixth Amendments] and that even aliens shall not be held to answer for a capital or other infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a grand jury, nor deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.

So yes, undocumented immigrants are protected by the rights within the Constitution. They are people, after all.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:13 Re:

Because the court bent that way is no proof that it was supposed to be that way. These aliens have been tweaking all possible loopholes in our constitution to use it against us for a long time. Now that the libe are in the seats of judiciary they are just making it easier for illegal aliens to play the system. So I see it my way and you see it their way. Have you offered up a sandwich to an illegal alien ever? I help homeless people and sick children, and never ask them for their papers. But fuck, we can’t be letting these people flock into our country like there were no borders.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:14

Because the court bent that way is no proof that it was supposed to be that way.

Irrelevant to the discussion. Whether you think the American government should treat immigrants like animals has no bearing on what the Supreme Court says about whether the Constitution protects non-citizens on American soil.

the lib[s] are in the seats of judiciary

Where have you been hiding the past three years? Between putting two justices on the Supreme Court and stacking federal courts with conservative ideologues in a bid to undo Roe v Wade (among other things), the Trump administration has made sure the American judiciary will lean conservative for at least a generation.

we can’t be letting these people flock into our country like there were no borders

Y’know, not for nothin’, but neither you nor any other troll who suggests that anyone here said they are in favor of “open borders” have ever offered a direct citation for that claim. And I’m not betting on you producing one now, either.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:15 Re:

When did I ever say the government should be treating the illegal aliens like animals. They are citizens of foreign countries. There should be at least a bare minimum requirement of them to enter our country at least. Even more stringent requirements if they wish to stay. What a wild wxodus of foreigners will do to this country is beyond most comprehension.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:16 Re:

When did I ever say the government should be treating the illegal aliens like animals.

It was rhetorical hyperbole. The point is that what you think the law should be has no bearing on what the law is. And the law clearly says that even illegal aliens have the right to due process.

There should be at least a bare minimum requirement of them to enter our country at least.

Sure. No one has said otherwise. None of that refutes what Stephen or anyone else has said. Even if they fail to meet those requirements, they still have certain rights.

What a wild wxodus of foreigners will do to this country is beyond most comprehension.

First of all, it’s “influx”. An exodus would involve a bunch of people leaving this country, not entering.

Second, that is immaterial to whether illegal aliens do or should have rights. That is only an argument in favor of placing restrictions on who may enter or stay, something none of us dispute in the first place.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:17 Re:q

Due process does not have anything to do with these aliens unless they have committed crime. Processing them to vet them in order to identify them is not Due process. You people are confused. They do not come as immigrants, but as invaders. Immigration from the US into other countries requires a lot of money. How can you call it immigration when they simply cross over the border into our country posing risks and threats as they come with nothing more than the sweater in their hands. They left their belongings and life in their country. Since 9-11, the US has been at war with the very kinds of threats that you are protecting. That was not the architects of our constitution’s intent.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:18 Re:q

First, haven’t you been saying that being an illegal alien is a crime?

Second, illegal immigration is still immigration. All immigration means is someone travels from one country to another, primarily with the intention of staying for a long-time, indefinitely, or permanently. Having nothing doesn’t prove that they ever intend to return to their original home country, and while immigration is often costly, that 1) presumes that they’re coming legally, 2) ignores refugees, which is a less costly process, and 3) may be covered by someone from within the US.

Third, due process is required to convict someone of a crime, prove that someone did something unlawful, and/or deprive them of their rights, including the right not to have their genes taken. And yes, that also includes the allegation that someone is present unlawfully. You also need to go through due process in order to prove that, and that deportation is a lawful and appropriate remedy.

Fourth, even invaders are entitled to due process. Everyone is entitled to due process within our borders, no matter how heinous the crime, how obvious their culpability, or how much we may dislike them.

Fifth, even legal immigrants may pose some risk or threat to us. Every single one of the terrorists in the U.S. have been either U.S. citizens or foreigners with all the necessary legal documents and permissions necessary to be within our country. This includes the people who directly participated in 9/11. Compared to U.S. citizens and legal residents, the proportion of illegal aliens who commit violent, sexual, or heinous crimes is much smaller.

Sixth, if the only thing they’re bringing with them is the sweater in their hands, how much of a risk do they really pose?

Seventh, yes, actually, processing, vetting, and identifying potential immigrants/aliens is part of due process, though none of us had actually been talking about that.

Eighth, the founders intended to avoid the government forcibly deporting people on a whim, something that people did have to worry about in many countries at that time. Also, the founders only intended to allow white male property owners to vote, and you’re ignoring that one of the relevant, operative parts of the Constitution—the 14th Amendment—had noting to do with what the original authors of the Constitution had in mind, which is why the Constitution was amended in the first place.

Scary Devil Monastery (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:14 Re:

"Because the court bent that way is no proof that it was supposed to be that way."

So you reject the constitution, as written.
And you reject the interpretation of it by SCOTUS.

I have news for you in that case. If neither the constitution nor court interpretations of it agree with you then perhaps you need to face the fact that you don’t, in fact, give a shit about that constitution and are just being a racist prick who’s screaming "Ausländer Raus!".

bhull242 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:14 Re:

Actually, “due process” is needed in order to determine any unlawful behavior, not just crimes. And last I checked, being an illegal alien is unlawful behavior. It is also needed in order to remove any person’s rights.

You need to prove that the person is indeed an illegal alien and that deportation is the appropriate remedy in order to deport someone for illegally entering or remaining in the country. It’s typically not a high bar, but it’s still necessary.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:13 Re:

I’m guessing this is the same asshat that made that claim last time.

It is like a child continuously asking for a cookie.