Pennsylvania House Judiciary committee hears dueling arguments on expanding DNA collection
Loading...
Summary
Witnesses and advocates gave conflicting testimony on Senate Bill 912: academics and survivors said broader arrestee DNA collection could solve cold cases and prevent wrongful convictions, while the ACLU warned it would erode privacy and likely face Pennsylvania constitutional challenges; the committee took no vote.
HARRISBURG — The Pennsylvania House Judiciary Committee on Monday heard sharply divided testimony about proposals to expand preconviction DNA collection, with crime‑victim advocates and a University of Chicago researcher arguing broader access to CODIS would solve more crimes and prevent wrongful convictions, and the ACLU warning the policy would create pervasive genetic surveillance.
John Roman, director for public safety and justice at the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, told lawmakers that enlarging the Combined DNA Index System, commonly called CODIS, would increase investigative hits and serve as a general deterrent. "A larger CODIS DNA database increases the probability that a suspect will be identified and arrested," Roman said, and he cited national figures noting CODIS profiles grew from about 2,900,000 in 2005 to roughly 25,000,000 this summer. Roman also estimated the incremental cost of collecting and testing DNA in cases that produce new arrests at about $3,500 per arrest.
Survivors told personal stories of delayed justice. Ashley Spence, founder of the DNA Justice Project, recounted that a DNA match seven years after her assault led to a conviction: "California is one of 19 states that collects DNA for every single felony arrest, and this is a process that changed my life forever," she said, urging the legislature to adopt broader arrestee collection. James Tillman, wrongfully convicted for nearly two decades and exonerated by DNA, said "DNA is justice" and asked lawmakers to pass S.B. 912 so DNA could be used "more like fingerprints." Both witnesses argued that routine collection from qualifying arrestees would close cold cases and speed exonerations.
By contrast, Elizabeth Randolph, legislative director for the ACLU of Pennsylvania, framed wholesale preconviction collection as a constitutional and privacy threat. "Preconviction DNA collection undermines the presumption of innocence," Randolph said, arguing that routine samples would permit repeated, suspicionless searches and could disproportionately subject communities of color to genetic surveillance. Randolph also pointed to possible state constitutional limits, noting Article I, Section 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution may provide broader privacy protections than the federal Fourth Amendment.
Committee members pressed witnesses about tradeoffs. Representative Schusterman asked Roman to clarify comparative effectiveness; Roman cited a randomized controlled trial across five cities in which DNA identified otherwise unknown suspects three times more often than fingerprints. Representative Kinkade invoked Riley v. California — the Supreme Court case on cell phone searches — to argue that DNA, like digital devices, contains dense personal information and deserves heightened protection. Representative Bonner asked whether expansion should be limited to violent felonies; Roman said the research does not clearly mark a precise line but argued felony arrests would capture the relevant population.
Witnesses and members also discussed administrative safeguards and statutory details raised in testimony: Roman and Spence said CODIS stores noncoding profile markers and that names and identifiers are maintained separately and released only to investigative teams; Randolph countered that many proposals lack automatic expungement and that tens of thousands of qualifying arrest records would add to databases without automatic removal. Testimony included numerical estimates derived from prior analyses: Roman said nationwide DNA‑aided investigations rose from roughly 10,000–15,000 per year in the 2000s to about 50,000 in the 2020s; Randolph cited an internal estimate that in 2024 Pennsylvania had roughly 121,000 criminal dockets, about 57,000 of which would have contained qualifying offenses under the bill proposal, and of those roughly 17,000 were later dismissed or withdrawn.
No formal vote was taken. Chairman Briggs thanked the witnesses, said the committee has no further sessions scheduled for the remainder of the year and adjourned the informational meeting. The hearing record will include written testimony submitted by the panel.
The committee did not act on Senate Bill 912 during the hearing; lawmakers requested additional context and raised concerns about both the criminal‑justice benefits advocates describe and the privacy and constitutional risks voiced by civil‑liberties groups.
