Latest news with #DNAcollection
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Wyden questions Trump admin's ‘chilling' immigrant DNA collection rule
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) – Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) is raising concerns over the Trump administration expanding a program that allows immigration enforcement agents to collect DNA from detained immigrants. In a letter sent Monday to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Attorney General Pam Bondi, Wyden criticized DHS and the Department of Justice for expanding the program in the final days of the first Trump administration, requiring DHS to build out a DNA collection program. As part of the program, the DNA is stored in a national criminal database. Wyden explained that under the program, DHS agents – authorized by the Attorney General – collect the DNA samples and send them to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for testing and add the samples to the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS). DON'T MISS: Beaverton father detained by ICE outside of preschool CODIS was originally authorized by Congress in 1994 to retain forensic evidence and to identify convicted sex offenders and violent criminals. The database is permanently searchable by law enforcement across the United States. From 2020 to 2024, the collection of immigrants' DNA has seen a 50-fold increase in the number of samples kept in the national database, as reported by the Los Angeles Times in May 2024. Over those four years, more than 1.5 million noncitizen profiles were added to the database, the LA Times reported, citing a report from . Parents out thousands as Beehive NW closes abruptly 'Governments exercising such broad discretion to involuntarily collect and retain DNA are repressive authoritarian regimes also engaging in gross human rights violations, such as genocide, ethnic cleansing, torture, and more,' Wyden wrote in his letter to Secretary Noem and Attorney General Bondi. 'In fact, the U.S. Government has condemned the involuntary collection of DNA by the People's Republic of China and has sanctioned entities engaged in this practice, yet this practice appears to be ongoing on our own soil.' The senator said the DNA samples include those of more than 133,000 children as young as four years old. Wyden additionally raised concerns that DHS agents are not clearly notifying noncitizens that their DNA is being taken and that some agents threaten arrest or criminal charges if immigrants refuse to provide a sample. Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now Some legal experts are also warning that the mass collection of immigrant DNA may be a violation of constitutional due process rights, Wyden claimed, noting the Trump administration has allowed DHS agents to detain and collect samples from immigrants without judicial authorization. 'Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials are not required by law to seek judicial authorization to detain noncitizens, and it seems noncitizens can be detained for the sole purpose of collecting their DNA. ICE and CBP officials have broad discretion for detention, and since the Trump administration intentionally expanded its detention efforts, DHS dramatically expanded the federal government's collection of DNA by 5,000%. Whereas prior administrations sought to limit DNA collection from noncitizens, DHS added over 1.5 million DNA profiles of noncitizens to CODIS after 2020,' Wyden wrote. 'Reporting suggests that the Trump administration has added another quarter million people's DNA to CODIS within four months this year and that the vast majority of this DNA come from immigration encounters with Mexican, Venezuelan, Cuban, and Haitian citizens. The Trump administration appears to be broadly detaining individuals and collecting their DNA for permanent storage in CODIS. Reporting also suggests that 97% of noncitizens whose DNA was collected were detained under CBP's civil authority, and not on any criminal charges,' Wyden continued. In his letter, Wyden questioned the government's interest in collecting DNA samples from noncitizens during detention and immigration enforcement and is seeking answers about how the federal agencies use the DNA samples. Wyden's deadline for a response is August 1. KOIN 6 News has reached out to the Department of Justice. This story will be updated if we receive a response. In a statement to KOIN 6 News on Thursday, a DHS spokesperson said, 'In order to secure our borders, CBP is devoting every resource available to identify who is entering our country. We are not letting terrorists, human smugglers, child sex traffickers, and other criminals enter American communities. Toward this end, CBP collects DNA samples for submission to the FBI's Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) from persons in CBP custody who are arrested on federal criminal charges, and from aliens detained under CBP's authority who are subject to fingerprinting and not otherwise exempt from the collection requirement.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Independent
6 days ago
- Science
- The Independent
Oxford University Press scraps China-sponsored journal after longstanding protests
Oxford University Press will cease publishing the Chinese government-sponsored journal, Forensic Sciences Research, after 2025. The decision follows years of controversy regarding the journal's alleged ethical breaches over DNA collection from Uyghur and other ethnic minority groups in China. Critics highlighted concerns that studies published in the journal used DNA samples from minorities without their consent. OUP had previously retracted at least two papers and issued an "expression of concern" for another due to these ethical issues. Forensic Sciences Research will be published by KeAi in China from next year.
The Independent
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
Oxford University Press halts publication of China-sponsored journal after years of outrage
The Oxford University Press (OUP) will stop publishing a Chinese government-sponsored academic journal following years of outrage over the publication allegedly breaching ethic rules over DNA collection from minorities. A statement on the website of the Forensic Sciences Research (FSR) read that the journal will longer be published by OUP after this year. The last issue of the quarterly journal to be published will be Volume 10, Issue 4, it said. The Chinese justice ministry-sponsored journal has come under increasing scrutiny for publishing studies that allegedly did not meet ethical standards about DNA collection from Uyghur and other ethnic minority groups in China 's northwestern territory of Xinjiang. Critics of the studies published in the journal have argued that the subjects may not have consented for their DNA to be used in the research. The controversial journal has been published since 2023 and financially supported by the Academy of Forensic Science, which is run by China's ministry of justice. The academy describes the journal as 'the only English quarterly journal in the field of forensic science in China that focuses on forensic medicine', according to The Guardian. The OUP has retracted at least two papers published in the journal on DNA samples from Chinese minorities due to ethical concerns. A study published before OUP acquired the journal, analysed DNA samples collected from 264 Uyghur individuals. The paper claims that participants consented for the research – a claim refuted by critics. The press in 2024 reportedly published an 'expression of concern' about the article, but did not retract the paper. Another study of particular concern was published in 2023 involved 50 'bloodstain' samples taken from Xibe ethnic minority individuals, according to Oxford's student-run newspaper Cherwell. The papers were first flagged by Yves Moreau, an engineering professor at KU Leuven in Belgium, who spent years investigating how Chinese researchers collect genetic data from vulnerable populations. 'Starting next year, Forensic Sciences Research will be published by KeAi, Elsevier's distinguished co-publishing partner in China. This transition is rooted in thoughtful reflection and pragmatic necessity, driven in part by a shared ambition to grow, evolve, and further enhance the journal's global impact,' FSR said. Beijing has been accused of committing 'crimes against humanity" against the Uyghurs and other ethnic minority groups over the past decade through alleged widespread abuses, including mass incarceration, forced labour, torture, sexual assault and intensified surveillance. The Xi Jinping administration has routinely denied the allegations of genocide made by the US and other Western nations as 'the lie of the century'. The UN says China has detained more than a million minority Muslims, mostly Uyghurs, since a dramatic escalation in counterterrorism measures in 2017. Beijing initially denied the existence of any Uyghur detention centres before defending them as 're-education centres'. The UK, US and Australia were among 15 countries that issued a joint statement at the UN against alleged human rights abuses in Xinjiang and Tibet.
The Guardian
7 days ago
- Science
- The Guardian
Oxford University Press to stop publishing China-sponsored science journal
Oxford University Press (OUP) will no longer publish a controversial academic journal sponsored by China's Ministry of Justice after years of concerns that several papers in the publication did not meet ethical standards about DNA collection. A statement published on the website of Forensic Sciences Research (FSR) states that OUP will stop publishing the quarterly journal after this year. FSR is a journal that comes from China's Academy of Forensic Science, an agency that sits under the Ministry of Justice. The academy describes FSR as 'the only English quarterly journal in the field of forensic science in China that focuses on forensic medicine'. It has been published by OUP since 2023. Several papers published in FSR have attracted criticism because they study genetic data from Uyghurs and other heavily surveilled ethnic minorities in China. Critics say subjects in the studies may not have freely consented to their DNA samples being used in the research and that the studies could help to enhance the mass surveillance of those populations. One study, published in 2020, analysed blood samples from 264 Uyghurs in Ürümqi, the capital of the Xinjiang region in north-west China. The paper states that the people giving the samples consented to the research and that their data was anonymised. The lead author on the study is affiliated with China's state security apparatus via the Xinjiang Police College, which provided a research grant. In 2024, OUP published an 'expression of concern' about the article, responding to questions about whether or not Uyghurs in Xinjiang could freely refuse to participate in a study conducted by representatives of China's state security. The paper has not been retracted. Two other papers published in FSR based on DNA samples from Chinese populations have been retracted by OUP since 2023 because of ethical concerns. In both cases, several of the researchers came from Chinese police authorities. Forensic science research is often carried out under the auspices of police authorities, but in China, where there the state security apparatus is not subject to checks and balances, there is concern this kind of research may not meet international ethical standards. Uyghurs in Xinjiang are subject to intense surveillance by state authorities and between 2016 and 2018 about a million of them are estimated to have been detained in what China calls 'vocational training centres'. The UN said China's policies in Xinjiang could constitute crimes against humanity. There are also reports of Xinjiang authorities collecting DNA samples from millions of Uyghurs under the guise of health checks, but which Uyghurs and human rights groups have said are compulsory and designed to enhance surveillance. Yves Moreau, a professor of engineering at the University of Leuven in Belgium who focuses on DNA analysis, first raised concerns about OUP's relationship with FSR and about several studies. He said he was grateful for OUP's decision but that the brief public statement on the matter 'fails to address the important issues at stake'. A statement published on FSR's website, which is hosted by OUP, said: 'Forensic Sciences Research will no longer be published by Oxford University Press (OUP) after the 2025 volume. The last issue published by OUP will be Volume 10, Issue 4.' OUP acquired the journal in 2023. Under the terms of the publishing agreement between OUP and the Academy of Forensic Sciences, a copy of which was seen by the Guardian, the deal gave OUP the right to solicit paid advertisers in the pages of the journal. The agreement also gives OUP the right to collect any revenues received by the Academy of Forensic Sciences related to the journal. OUP declined to elaborate on why it was ending the relationship with FSR. In recent years there has been increasing scrutiny about the ethical standards of genetic research papers from China. Last year, a genetics journal from a leading scientific publisher retracted 18 papers from China due to concerns about human rights. The concerns centre on whether or not vulnerable populations in China can freely refuse to participate, especially when researchers come from organisations, such as the police, affiliated with state security. There are also concerns that this kind of forensic DNA sampling could produce research that enhances the mass surveillance of those populations. Moreau said: 'Forensic genetics is an area where specific caution is needed because this is the research that powers police DNA identification and databases. While DNA identification is a valuable technique to help solve crimes, it can raise privacy and ethical issues.' He added that the mass surveillance of minorities in Xinjiang and Tibet made China a particularly challenging country to enforce international norms about ethical research and human rights. FSR's launch in 2016 was accompanied by an editorial that stated it is sponsored by an affiliate of China's Ministry of Justice. Duarte Nuno Vieira, the co-editor-in-chief of FSR, has previously denied financial support from China's Ministry of Justice had any impact on the journal's editorial policies. Nuno Vieira did not respond to a request for comment. But in an article published on Tuesday, the FSR editors wrote that the journal was at 'a moment of transformation, firmly rooted in its past successes, and yet reaching with confident hands towards an even more luminous future'. The publication of the journal will be taken over by KeAi, a China-based joint venture run by the Dutch scientific publisher Elsevier and a Chinese partner. China's Ministry of Justice and the Academy of Forensic Sciences did not respond to a request for comment.
WIRED
16-07-2025
- Politics
- WIRED
DHS Faces New Pressure Over DNA Taken From Immigrant Children
Jul 16, 2025 1:30 PM The US government has added the DNA of approximately 133,000 migrant children and teens to a criminal database, which critics say could mean police treat them like suspects 'indefinitely.' U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem takes part in the Hill Nation Summit, co-hosted by The Hill and NewsNation, at the Willard Hotel on July 16, 2025, in Washington, DC. Photograph:United States Senator Ron Wyden is pressing the United States departments of Homeland Security and Justice to explain how and why they are collecting DNA from immigrants, including children, on a massive scale. Wyden confronted the agencies with demands this week to explain the scope, legality, and oversight of the government's DNA collection. In letters to DOJ and DHS, the Oregon Democrat also criticized what he described as a 'chilling expansion' of a sprawling and opaque system, accusing Trump administration officials of withholding even basic facts about its operation. Citing recent data that shows DHS took genetic samples from approximately 133,000 migrant children and teenagers—first reported by WIRED in May and made public through a Freedom of Information Act request filed by Georgetown Law—Wyden says the government has provided no 'justification for the permanent collection of the children's DNA samples.' Their DNA profiles now reside in CODIS, an FBI database historically used to identify suspects in violent crimes. Critics argue the system—which retains information indefinitely by default—was never intended to hold genetic data from civil immigration detainees, especially minors. In the last four years, DHS has collected DNA from tens of thousands of minors, among them at least 227 children aged 13 or younger, government data shows. The vast majority of those profiled—more than 70 percent—were citizens of just four countries: Mexico, Venezuela, Cuba, and Haiti. 'By including these children's DNA in CODIS, their profiles will be queried every time a search is done of the database,' Wyden writes. 'These children will be treated by law enforcement as suspects for every investigation of every future crime, indefinitely.' The US government has been steadily positioning noncitizens at the forefront of a massive genetic surveillance regime for years, collecting DNA almost entirely from immigrants in civil custody, while feeding it into systems built for mostly criminal tracking. Recent analysis by the Georgetown Law Center on Privacy and Technology reveals that more than a quarter million DNA samples have been processed and added to CODIS over the past four months alone, accelerating the crime-fighting tool's transformation into a warehouse for migrant DNA. Wyden has asked attorney general Pam Bondi and Homeland Security secretary Kristi Noem to release details on how, and under what legal authority, the DNA samples are gathered, stored, and used. He further pressed for data on the number of samples collected, especially from minors, and asked the officials to list by what policies DHS currently governs the coercion, expungement, and sharing of DNA data. 'When Congress authorized the laws surrounding DNA collection by the federal government over two decades ago, lawmakers sought to address violent crime,' Wyden says. 'It was not intended as a means for the federal government to collect and permanently retain the DNA of all noncitizens.' Natalie Baldassarre, a spokesperson for the DOJ, acknowledged the agency had received Wyden's inquiry but declined to comment further. DHS did not respond to a request for comment about its practice of harvesting children's DNA. The Center on Privacy and Technology, which investigates emerging surveillance technologies and their impacts on civil liberties, contends the agency's aggressive DNA collection is only one node in a broader effort to redefine policing through vast use of biometric and behavioral data. In a 2024 report, it argued that genetic surveillance has 'almost no use in immigration enforcement operations as they currently function,' suggesting the practice is a stalking horse for normalizing the use of genetic profiling across everyday police work. Constitutional law expert David Cole flagged this mission creep in the wake of the US government's post-9/11 abuses, writing: 'Measures initially targeted at noncitizens may well come back to haunt us all.' Surveillance scholars have also widely observed that new technologies—especially those with invasive potential—are often deployed against vulnerable groups before being normalized across society. Immigrants, under this regime, are more frequently targeted for biometric data collection because they are mostly powerless politically, unable to resist being cast as test subjects in surveillance programs that, once embedded, rarely retain their original scope. 'The surveillance the federal government experiments with on immigrants today will inevitably be deployed against citizens tomorrow,' says Anthony Enriquez, vice president of advocacy at Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights. 'The federal government's project of mass DNA collection and genetic surveillance of immigrants has already begun to sweep up US citizens,' he says. 'It's a shorter road than ever from surveillance to criminalization to a detention center in rural Louisiana or a mega-prison in El Salvador.'
