Case: Briggs v. Mullin
1:26-cv-05238 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Filed Date: May 6, 2026
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
Case Summary
This case challenged the federal government's practice of collecting and indefinitely retaining DNA from individuals arrested during protests at the Broadview, Illinois ICE Detention Center, raising critical questions about Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly.
On May 6, 2026, protesters filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and their respective directors and agents in their official capacities. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs alleged that federal agents unlawfully compelled them to provide DNA samples following protest-related arrests, that the FBI processed those samples into profiles and uploaded them to the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) database for indefinite retention, and that the government's broader surveillance of protest activity chilled protected speech. In particular, per the complaint, plaintiffs were arrested by federal agents while protesting or documenting protests at the Broadview ICE Detention Center during "Operation Midway Blitz" in fall 2025. Each was compelled to provide a DNA sample. Some plaintiffs were never charged, while others had charges dismissed. Of 92 protest-related arrests during the operation, the government obtained only one conviction, which was unrelated to the Broadview protests. Plaintiffs alleged that DHS had undertaken a massive hiring surge while cutting constitutional training, had expanded surveillance of protesters through facial recognition, license plate readers, and social media monitoring, and had dismantled internal privacy oversight. Moreover, senior DHS officials had made public statements that plaintiffs characterized as encouraging aggressive targeting of protesters.
Plaintiffs brought seven counts: (1) that the DNA Act (34 U.S.C. § 40702) was unconstitutional as applied under the Fourth Amendment; (2) unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment; (3) unreasonable seizure through indefinite DNA retention; (4) First Amendment retaliation and chilling of protected speech; (5-6) violations of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) as contrary to law and in excess of statutory authority; and (7) ultra vires agency action. Plaintiffs sought declaratory relief, a permanent injunction against DNA collection and retention under the challenged circumstances, expungement and destruction of all plaintiffs' DNA samples and profiles from federal databases, and attorneys' fees. The case was assigned to District Judge Jeremy C. Daniel, of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
This case is ongoing as of June 2026.
Summary Authors
Simon Jillson (6/8/2026)
People
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73301943/parties/briggs-v-mullin/
Dunne, Carey R. (Illinois)
Folch, Monica Pilar (Illinois)
Goldberg, Zack (Illinois)
Morsch, James A. (Illinois)
Reiser, Martha (Illinois)
Documents in the Clearinghouse
Docket
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73301943/briggs-v-mullin/
Last updated July 22, 2026, 3:15 a.m.
Case Details
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government
Trump Administration 2.0: Litigation and Investigations Involving the Government
Key Dates
Filing Date: May 6, 2026
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Plaintiffs (Dana Briggs, Ian Sampson, Grace Cooper, and Jacqueline Guataquira) were protesting or documenting protests at the Broadview ICE Detention Center near Chicago
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: Unknown
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Federal
ICE
U.S. Border Patrol
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Department of Justice
Defendant Type(s):
Facility Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
Constitutional Clause(s):
Unreasonable search and seizure
Other Dockets:
Northern District of Illinois 1:26-cv-05238
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Relief Sought:
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Issues
General/Misc.:
Discrimination Area:
Content/viewpoint discrimination
Immigration/Border:
Policing:
Inadequate citizen complaint investigations and procedures
Over/Unlawful Detention (policing)
Case Summary of Briggs v. Mullin, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/48177/ (last updated 6/8/2026).