In a move that has sparked widespread debate across the U.S., the National Guard has been directed to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) by fingerprinting and collecting DNA samples from immigrant detainees. This policy shift aims to strengthen immigration enforcement and identification processes but has raised legal, ethical, and humanitarian questions.
This article explores what the new directive means, why it’s happening, and how it impacts immigrants, communities, and the future of immigration enforcement in the United States.
Why the National Guard Is Getting Involved in Immigration
The National Guard immigrant detainee fingerprinting initiative is part of a broader federal strategy to crack down on illegal immigration and support ICE operations. Traditionally, the National Guard plays a support role during national emergencies, natural disasters, or times of war. However, their presence in immigration enforcement is not new.
In the past, National Guard troops have been deployed to assist at the southern border, mainly with surveillance, logistics, and infrastructure. What’s different now is their direct involvement in collecting biometric data — fingerprinting and DNA swabs — from immigrant detainees.
According to senior federal officials, this new task will help improve identification accuracy, speed up deportation processes, and prevent criminal suspects from slipping through the cracks.
What Biometric Data Will Be Collected?
Under this directive, National Guard members will help ICE agents in:
- Fingerprinting detainees
- Collecting cheek swabs for DNA testing
- Photographing and facial recognition (in some facilities)
- Inputting data into federal criminal databases
This information will be stored in systems like the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) and shared with law enforcement agencies nationwide. The primary justification, as given by officials, is to ensure no one with a criminal past is released mistakenly.
However, critics argue that such measures could target even those with no criminal record and blur the lines between immigration enforcement and criminal punishment.
The Legal and Ethical Debate Around the Directive
The decision to use the National Guard for immigrant detainee fingerprinting has set off a storm of criticism from civil rights groups, lawmakers, and immigrant advocates.
Key Concerns Raised:
- Violation of civil liberties: Critics argue that collecting DNA without consent can be seen as a violation of privacy, especially for those not charged with a crime.
- Legal gray area: Many detainees are held on civil, not criminal, charges — meaning they haven’t broken laws but rather administrative rules (e.g., overstaying a visa).
- Risk of racial profiling: There is concern that certain communities, particularly Latinos, will be disproportionately affected.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) released a statement calling the practice “an unconstitutional use of military force against civilians,” especially given the fact that the National Guard is not a federal law enforcement body.
How the Policy Is Being Justified by Federal Authorities
Proponents of the policy say it is essential for national security. A Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spokesperson stated that the growing number of border crossings has stretched ICE resources thin. Bringing in the National Guard to support back-end processing — including biometric data collection — allows ICE agents to focus on fieldwork.
The policy is framed as temporary and voluntary on the part of state governments. However, not all states are on board.
States Respond: Some Agree, Others Push Back
Since the announcement, several states have responded in very different ways:
States Supporting the Policy:
- Texas and Florida have already committed National Guard units to assist ICE.
- Arizona is reportedly in talks with DHS to join the program.
These states argue that illegal immigration contributes to crime, job loss, and strained public services, and thus justify their support.
States Opposing the Policy:
- California, New York, and Illinois have strongly opposed the move, citing constitutional and human rights concerns.
- Some governors have vowed to keep their National Guard members out of ICE operations entirely.
The growing divide between state responses reflects the ongoing tension between federal and local control over immigration policies.
What This Means for Immigrant Detainees
For immigrants held in detention — many of whom are seeking asylum or fleeing persecution — the involvement of the National Guard brings new levels of uncertainty and fear.
Impacts on Detainees:
- Longer processing times due to increased data collection steps.
- Potential misuse of DNA data, especially for those not convicted of any crime.
- Fear and confusion, particularly among those who don’t speak English or understand the U.S. legal system.
Immigration lawyers warn that a person’s genetic data can be used in ways they don’t consent to, including future criminal investigations or familial searches. There’s also worry that once collected, this data may never be deleted, even if a person is later released or granted legal status.
The Role of Technology and Data in Modern Immigration Control
The National Guard immigrant detainee fingerprinting strategy is part of a broader shift toward data-driven immigration enforcement. Agencies like ICE, CBP (Customs and Border Protection), and DHS are increasingly relying on technology to:
- Track immigrant movements
- Identify repeat border crossers
- Match individuals to international watchlists
- Prevent fraud in asylum applications
While these tools offer greater efficiency, they also raise major concerns about government overreach, surveillance, and data privacy.
Experts warn that as more data is collected and stored, the chance of misuse, hacking, or data leaks grows — something that could put vulnerable immigrants at even greater risk.
Public Reaction: Mixed and Heated
The public response to the policy has been divided.
Supporters Say:
- It’s necessary for national safety.
- It helps identify and remove dangerous criminals.
- It supports overwhelmed immigration agencies.
Opponents Say:
- It’s dehumanizing and invasive.
- It militarizes immigration enforcement.
- It targets people who haven’t committed crimes.
Social media has also seen trending hashtags like #StopMilitarySurveillance and #ProtectImmigrants, as well as protests in cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington D.C.
What Happens Next?
The future of this directive may depend on:
- Legal challenges from advocacy groups
- State-level resistance or cooperation
- Upcoming elections, where immigration will likely be a key issue
- Public opinion, which could pressure lawmakers to review or revise the policy
Federal agencies have not given a clear timeline for how long National Guard involvement will continue, but sources suggest it could be extended if border crossings continue to rise.
Conclusion: A Turning Point in Immigration Policy?
The use of the National Guard for immigrant detainee fingerprinting and DNA swabbing marks a major development in how the U.S. handles immigration enforcement. While some view it as a necessary step in maintaining border security, others fear it sets a dangerous precedent by expanding military involvement in civil matters.
The debate raises important questions:
- Where should the line be drawn between security and privacy?
- How do we protect national interests while respecting human rights?
- What role should the military play in domestic law enforcement?
For now, what’s clear is that the immigration system is under intense pressure — and decisions like this will shape its future for years to come.
Do Follow USA Glory On Instagram
Read Next – Over 40 and Eager to Join ICE? Here’s Who Can Now Join the Force
