A new rule proposed by Attorney General Barr could pose some legality issues during its 20-day comment period. The rule would require DNA collection from immigrants crossing the U.S. border, including asylum seekers. 

The DNA would be added to the Combined DNA Index System in an effort to solve crime. The process of collecting the DNA is fairly common. 

The collection entails swabbing someone’s cheek and “law enforcement uses these DNA sequences to basically create DNA fingerprints for people based on variations in the segments of the hereditary material,” stated Associate Professor of Biology at St. Lawrence University, Mike Temkin. 

However, the aspect of adding an individual’s genetic fingerprint to a national database brings up questions regarding legality.

“The problem that comes into play, which will probably end up in court, is that people who are crossing the border legally, no one has a right to actually take a sample of their DNA simply because they just entered the country,” stated Temkin. 

What would have to happen is that the people crossing the border would need to be convicted of entering the country illegally, and then give a DNA sample, believes Temkin. 

The issue of legality with this rule relates to whether or not people should have their DNA put into a registry if they have not yet been convicted of crossing the border illegally.

The DNA Fingerprint Act of 2005 requires that anyone arrested in the U.S. needs to provide a DNA sample, including those detained at the border. 

“For the most part in regards to immigration that law was not broadly applied because the core point would be to collect DNA from people who are already charged with a crime, and if you apply it to immigrant communities you are applying it to people who have not yet gone through the court system,” stated Zenel Garcia, Visiting Professor of International Relations at St. Lawrence University. 

Until they have gone through the judicial system it becomes problematic to take DNA right at the border because it seems to be furthering the idea of “us versus them” according to Garcia.

 The proposed rule seems to be a way to perpetuate the narratives that the current administration wants to enforce. “Whenever I hear these kinds of statements I feel that they are a way to distract from the realities of what is going on, it is hard to keep track of what is going on after one outrageous thing to another,” said Anna Sorensen, a candidate running for Canton village trustee. 

In addition to the legal issues that this rule brings up, it also reveals an effort to limit the flow of immigrants into the country according to Sorenson.

It adds to a narrative that “creates existential threats from foreign populations, so it becomes perfectly okay to use these extraordinary measures,” stated Garcia, which is a fear that other students on campus have if the rule is applied to student visas. “I don’t want the government to know me that personally” stated St. Lawrence University student Lehlomela Mofali ’23. “If I have nothing to hide, what are they looking for?”

There will be a 20-day comment period after the rule is published in the federal registry. This period allows the public to present any issues that they have with the rule.