So apparently it's the thing that when a newborn baby is born and this goes back
since like the 1970s, they do what's called a hell pinprick where they
take a bit of blood from the baby to test it for a variety of different diseases.
That's the core reason that they do it.
That turns out to be not the only thing they do with that blood.
In some cases.
It can be used even years and years later by the cops to try to solve crimes.
And that's where it gets a little bit dystopic and a little bit weird.
So there's a lawsuit that's been filed In New Jersey.
They alleged that state police sought a newborn's blood sample from
the New Jersey Department of Health to investigate the child's father
in connection with a sexual assault from the 1990s.
They say that police obtained the blood sample of a newborn child who's now
by the way, elementary school age.
So this was years later to perform a DNA analysis that
linked the baby's father to a crime.
Was done using a technique called investigative genetic genealogy or
forensic genealogy.
It involves isolating DNA left at a crime scene and using it to create a digital
genetic profile of a subject with suspect, which is already a terrifying phrase,
investigators can upload this information to genealogy websites where other people
have freely shared their own DNA information in the hope of connecting with
family members are learning about their ancestry now because D.
N.
A. Is shared across families.
That means investigators can use relatively close matches to try to map out
the suspect family tree and possibly narrow down on their identity.
As a side note.
Yes men If those genealogy websites they do cooperate with law enforcement this way
and people are knowingly given their DNA.
It is interesting to know if you're like 2% Irish I will grant you that but
it might be used by someone else anyway.
Yeah once that information is out there they can use it and they apparently do and
look potentially catching someone who committed a sexual assault I think
is a good thing.
But the fact that like it's not like the baby could consent or
not to the blood being taken and
I doubt the parents knew back then that it could be used.
And in this case it might seem just but
there being like an entire ever expanding like database of baby D.
N. A. That can be used to track people down.
I'm not a fan of that Jackson but I don't know what do you think?
Well it's definitely a cause for concern and in in real regulation that the people
have to have some type of real hold over otherwise man that could be used for
all types of stuff that could be used just to find people for
whatever reasons you know what I mean?
Because if you have some real resources behind that you could identify who
somebody is.
And then you know obviously we have other ways to track people via just you know
what they do with their credit cards and where they stayed and stuff.
So that combined with D.
N.
A.
Man you know especially the way the country is going is it's leaning more and
more into authoritarianism especially just you know big portions of it.
So you know this is definitely something that
you know is gonna have to see some real policy attention and
including just like general data that people have personal data and privacy.
So I think this all lumps into it.
Yeah I really do think that what we're gonna get to a couple other ways this sort
of data is used.
I really do think that like it is time for a reckoning about digital privacy.
I feel like people have occasionally lashed out at like like one social
media network for some sort of violation or something like that or
a leak of data from a credit card company.
But like fundamentally I think that a lot has changed way faster than the law has
changed.
So in particular when it comes to genetic material I feel like that is worth
a little bit of government attention and
then we can get into things like you know like cookie tracking and stuff like that.
There's a lot of issues with with the sort of information that people can freely
access whether for law enforcement reasons or just for
you know capitalist exploitation.
But I want to give you an example of a little a little bit broader how this works
because we have this one case we've already talked about.
So back in December 2020, a local TV station reported that police in California
had issued five search warrants to access a newborn screening screening samples and
then at least one cold case, there was solved with the help of a newborn blood.
In a recent case, sort of related police in San Francisco used a sample collected
during a woman's rape exam to tie her to an unrelated property crime years later.
And so people are saying that this is an unlawful search and seizure and
like as with the baby blood, there are court cases to try to challenge this.
But I wonder with like the judiciary that we have,
what are the chances that this ends up being prohibited?
Like if this gets to the Supreme Court,
we're supposed to believe that the like rabid conservative Supreme Court we have
right now would hamper the police's ability to do this.
I mean, never,
never mind the fact that in theory conservatives should be against this.
They're against Big Brother and all that they say.
But conservative justices, I wonder, I feel like,
I feel like we really need to take stock of this.
Jackson something needs to be done legislation wise.
Well in far right wing conservatives are definitely in favor of anything that
increases authoritative power and
look what they just did with, I think it was the Arizona case and
the Miranda rights, you know, the where they basically made it.
So they, you gotta read it too long if you don't want to, you know, basically.
So, you know, absolutely, there's no reason for
us to believe that if this made it to the Supreme Court,
that the current bench wouldn't be like, this is great, you know what I mean?
So that's it's just crazy to see how how such few people can have
this large of an impact on the country in people's lives.