Free + Fair Lawsuit: U.S. Illegally Collects, Uploads D.N.A. of Citizens Attending Protests

Lawsuit Reveals Scope of D.N.A Collection and Retention by Second Trump Administration 

Major Test Case Would Force I.C.E., Others to Stop Amassing D.N.A. from People Detained for “Non-Serious Offenses”

FREE + FAIR LITIGATION GROUP today announced a major lawsuit to end the U.S. government’s unlawful practice of collecting and databasing DNA from every citizen that it detains for non-serious offenses, including peaceful observers and protesters arrested by ICE and CBP during the second Trump administration. The plaintiffs – including a U.S. Air Force Veteran arrested in Chicago – are suing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to enforce the Supreme Court’s 2013 limits on DNA collection. The case is Briggs v. Mullin.

“In the second Trump administration, federal agents are wrongfully arresting observers and protestors in historic numbers, collecting their DNA, and uploading their genetic profiles into government databases,” said Carey Dunne of the 501(c)(3) nonprofit Free + Fair Litigation Group, which leads high-impact litigation to fight the advance of authoritarianism in the U.S. “Our lawsuit reveals a mass genetic surveillance program targeting Americans exercising their First Amendment rights. This is the kind of authoritarian nightmare the Constitution is designed to avoid.”

The lawsuit, filed in the Northern District of Illinois, alleges that the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”), Department of Justice (“DOJ”), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) are utilizing the DNA Act (“the Act”) to violate citizens’ First and Fourth Amendment rights by routinely collecting and retaining DNA from individuals arrested for “non-serious offenses,” despite the limitations on DNA collection imposed by the Supreme Court in 2013 in Maryland v. King. The lawsuit asks the court to find the Act and its implementing regulations unconstitutional and stop the routine collection of DNA from individuals arrested for non-serious offenses.

The plaintiffs, including a 71-year-old United States Air Force veteran, are four individuals who were arrested at protests in Chicago in September and October 2025 during “Operation Midway Blitz.” As documented in the lawsuit, they were arrested without probable cause, and their DNA was forcibly taken. The government never brought any criminal charges against two of the plaintiffs and dismissed minor charges against the others. However, it retained their DNA samples.

Lead plaintiff, Dana Briggs, said: “Being arrested and having my DNA taken for peacefully protesting was unsettling and deeply un-American. My charges were thrown out, but my private biological information is sitting in a lab somewhere. My family members never even went to a protest, but their biological profile is now government property, too. We’re suing to end this dystopian novel. We all have a right to our biological existence and to determine who has access to that information and how it will be used.”

The plaintiffs are represented pro bono by Free + Fair, Saul Ewing LLP, and Sher Tremonte LLP. Free + Fair thanked Saul Ewing and Sher Tremonte for their strong partnership and collaboration. Free + Fair thanked the Georgetown Law Center on Privacy and Technology for its 2024 report, Raiding the Genome, and its ongoing work on this issue. Free + Fair also thanked the Fordham Law School Rule of Law Clinic.

Dana Briggs

Dana Briggs is a 71-year-old decorated United States Air Force veteran. He has never been arrested previously. On Saturday, September 27, 2025, he went to the Broadview ICE Detention Center in Chicago to join a peaceful protest. When Mr. Briggs attempted to record masked, heavily armed federal agents who were ordering protestors to move, an agent shoved him, causing him to fall onto the ground. Agents then forcibly detained and arrested him. He was taken to a hospital for medical treatment where he was handcuffed to a bed. He was later taken to a DHS facility in Chicago and ordered to provide a DNA sample. He spent the remainder of the weekend in federal prison. Weeks later, the government moved to dismiss Mr. Briggs’ case, and a federal Judge dismissed the charges with prejudice in a scathing nine-page opinion.

DNA Collection 

A DNA sample can reveal a person’s race, ethnicity, carrier status for inheritable diseases, health conditions, and biological relatives. Since DNA is unique and shared across families, it can also be used to trace relatives and map genetic relationships. Additionally, DNA doesn’t expire – it’s impossible to predict what information will be available in five or ten years from samples taken today.

In 2000, Congress enacted the Act, which generally limited DNA collection to individuals convicted of serious violent crimes. However, over the years Congress has amended the Act to dramatically expand the government’s ability to collect DNA. In 2006, it amended the Act to allow the collection of DNA from any person arrested for any crime – which goes far beyond any state government’s DNA collection authority. As of 2004, the federal government had collected two million DNA profiles – in November 2025, the FBI reported that it had amassed 27 million DNA profiles.

In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled in Maryland v. King that the federal government may only collect DNA when five conditions exist: (1) a valid arrest supported by probable cause; (2) a serious offense; (3) pre-database judicial review confirming probable cause existed; (4) a government interest in identification; and (5) diminished privacy concerns due to technical limitations and statutory protections. This lawsuit is the first challenge to the federal government’s routine collection and storage of DNA from all arrestees.

The lawsuit details the context in which DNA is being collected in the second Trump administration. As alleged in the complaint:

“In the months leading up to their arrests and compelled DNA collection, DHS underwent a rapid and dramatic expansion of its immigration enforcement operations: a hiring surge that more than doubled the size of ICE, a reduction of training that stripped recruits of instruction in constitutional limits on their authority, and a parallel expansion of surveillance capabilities directed not only at immigration enforcement targets but at people who openly opposed the agency’s methods. It was in this context—a rapidly enlarged, undertrained enforcement force operating under official messaging that vilified protesters—that federal agents arrested Plaintiffs while they exercised their First Amendment rights, and triggered automatic, mandatory DNA collection.”

###

About Free + Fair Litigation Group

Free + Fair Litigation Group is a 501(c)(3) leading high-impact litigation to fight the advance of authoritarianism in the U.S. We develop major constitutional challenges to protect the rule of law, our rights, and our democracy. We select cases with the greatest potential to create nationally-significant case law to defeat these emerging threats. Then we leverage our national network to form talented teams that can prevail in these high-stakes, high-profile cases, and we provide senior leadership from inception through appeals.

Examples of our impact include: establishing the precedent that stopped the Trump administration from defunding schools over DEI programs, securing the voting rights of 1.4 million people in Florida, and forcing Idaho to roll back the most extreme book banning law in the nation, among others.