Hatshepsut

In March 2021, a 25-year-old US citizen was traveling through Chicago’s Midway airport when they were stopped by US border patrol agents. Though charged with no crime, the 25-year-old was subjected to a cheek swab to collect their DNA, which was sent to the FBI, according to a new report. The unnamed citizen was later admitted into the country. Their DNA was added to the FBI’s database of genetic material despite the lack of criminal charges.

The 25-year-old is one of about 2,000 US citizens whose DNA was collected between 2020 and 2024 by the Department of Homeland Security and shared with the FBI, researchers from Georgetown’s Center on Privacy and Technologyfound in an analysis of recently released data from US Customs and Border Protection (CBP). CBP officers took genetic material from some citizens as young as 14, according to the report.

“In a flagrant and alarming abuse of power, the DHS has been regularly collecting DNA from US citizens without legal justification,” said Stevie Glaberson, the director of research and advocacy at Georgetown’s privacy center. “The lack of checks on DHS’s collection power we think renders the program unconstitutional and violates the fourth amendment.”

Once immigration authorities collect DNA and share it with the FBI, it is stored in a database called the Combined DNA Index System (Codis), which is used across the country by local, state and federal law enforcement to identify suspects of crimes using their DNA. A May 2024 report, also from Georgetown’s Center on Privacy and Technology, found that CBP had been collecting the DNA information of every migrant detained. Border patrol was also collecting and sharing the DNA information of migrant children, according to the agency’s data. Initial estimates show that the sensitive genetic information of about 133,000 teens and children was being uploaded and stored in this federal criminal database in perpetuity.

The new CBP documents specifically cover how many US citizens have had their genetic information collected at various ports of entry, including major airports. The agency compiled the data and included the ages of the people whose DNA samples were collected by border agents as well as what charges were being levied against them. Like the 25-year-old, about 40 US citizens had DNA samples taken by CBP and shared with the FBI even though they were charged with no crime. Six of these were minors.

Under current regulation, CBP is permitted to collect the DNA of any individual – regardless of citizenship status – who has been arrested, is facing charges or has been convicted of a crime, as well as non-US citizens who have been detained.

What the law does not allow border patrol agents to do, Glaberson asserts, is collect the DNA samples of US citizens simply because they have been detained. But the recently released data shows that CBP does not have a system to check whether there is a lawful reason to collect an individual’s DNA, she said.

In some unusual cases, US citizens had their DNA swabbed for civil – not criminal – infractions such as “failure to declare” – which could be as simple as a person not declaring an item they bought abroad. In at least two cases of citizens having their DNA swabbed, the CBP agent simply wrote down “inspection by immigration officer” under charges.

“This is CBP’s own administrative data,” Glaberson said. “This is what they’re writing down. What that data shows is pretty chilling. In case after case, CBP agents are pulling US citizens aside and swabbing their mouths without any reason to do so.”

In about 865 of the nearly 2,000 cases of US citizens having their DNA swabbed by the CBP, no formal federal charges were filed. That means the cases never went before an independent arbiter such as a judge, according to Glaberson.

“None of these folks necessarily go before a judge to get the legality of detention and arrest reviewed,” she said.

DNA data can reveal incredibly sensitive information, including a person’s genetic relations and information about those relatives – regardless of their citizenship status. The information, accessible in a criminal database used to investigate suspects of crime, could subject people to investigations that they would otherwise not be swept up in, Glaberson said.

“If you think that your status as a citizen protects you from of the authoritarian practices, this is proof that it does not and will not,” she said.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Monday it will consider expanding President Donald Trump’s power to shape independent agencies by overturning a nearly century-old decision limiting when presidents can fire board members. In a 6-3 decision, the high court also allowed the Republican president to carry out the firing of Rebecca Slaughter, a Democratic member of the Federal Trade Commission, while the case plays out.

It’s the latest high-profile firing the court has allowed in recent months, signaling the conservative majority is poised to overturn or narrow a 1935 Supreme Court decision that found commissioners can only be removed for misconduct or neglect of duty. Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented from the decision allowing Slaughter’s firing. It comes after similar decisions affecting three other independent agencies.

“Congress, as everyone agrees, prohibited each of those presidential removals,” Kagan wrote. “Yet the majority, stay order by stay order, has handed full control of all those agencies to the President.” The majority did not detail their reasoning on allowing Slaughter’s firing, as is typical on the court’s emergency docket.

The justices are expected to hear arguments in December over whether to overturn a 90-year-old ruling known as Humphrey’s Executor. In that case, the court sided with another FTC commissioner who was fired by Franklin D. Roosevelt as the president worked to implement the New Deal. The justices unanimously found commissioners can be removed only for misconduct or neglect of duty.

That 1935 decision ushered in an era of powerful independent federal agencies charged with regulating labor relations, employment discrimination and public airwaves. But it has long rankled conservative legal theorists who argue such agencies should answer to the president. The Justice Department argues Trump can fire board members for any reason as he works to carry out his agenda. “The President and the government suffer irreparable harm when courts transfer even some of that executive power to officers beyond the President’s control,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote. Courts have no power to order reinstatement, only back pay, Sauer argued.

But Slaughter’s attorneys say that regulatory decisions will be based more on politics than on board members’ expertise if the president can fire congressionally confirmed board members at will. “If the President is to be given new powers Congress has expressly and repeatedly refused to give him, that decision should come from the people’s elected representatives,” they argued.

The court will hear arguments unusually early in the process, before the case has fully worked its way through lower courts.

The court rejected a push from two other board members of independent agencies who had asked the justices to also hear their cases if they took up the Slaughter case: Gwynne Wilcox, of the National Labor Relations Board, and Cathy Harris, of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Those cases will continue to work their way through the lower courts.

The FTC is a regulator enforcing consumer protection measures and antitrust legislation. The NLRB investigates unfair labor practices and oversees union elections, while the MSPB reviews disputes from federal workers.

The court has already allowed the president to fire all three board members for now. The court has suggested, however, that the president’s power to fire could have limits at the Federal Reserve, a prospect expected to be tested by the case of fired Fed Governor Lisa Cook.

cross-posted from: https://torishiro.com/notes/aas0771oukb100sr

What do you often find Punny?

@memes@lemmy.world #maths #jokes

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/45782563

cross-posted from: https://lemmus.org/post/12574737

Now There’s a Luigi Mangione Musical Coming to San Francisco in June, and It’s Already Selling Out

cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/25387405

Ahead of Luigi Mangione’s court appearance, supporters convened in-front of the courthouse holding banners, selling Luigi merch & parking billboard trucks that display info about UH denials [album]

http://luigimangioneinfo.com/

Welcome to the 8th annual Shkreli Awards, the Lown Institute’s top ten list of the worst examples of profiteering and dysfunction in healthcare, named for the infamous “pharma bro” Martin Shkreli.