DHS Reverses Course on Attempts to Identify Social Media Critics of ICE

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has retreated from efforts to unmask the owners of Instagram and Facebook accounts that were monitoring Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity in Pennsylvania.

An anonymous account holder, referred to as John Doe, initiated legal action to prevent ICE from identifying him and other online critics via subpoenas directed at Meta, arguing that such actions infringed upon protected First Amendment activities.

Initially, DHS opposed Doe's motion to quash the subpoenas, claiming that these community watch groups compromised the safety of ICE agents by sharing “pictures and videos of agents’ faces, license plates, and weapons, among other things.” DHS likened this to actions that “threaten ICE agents to impede the performance of their duties,” extending arguments voiced by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, who suggested that revealing ICE agents' identities is a criminal act, despite reports from Wired highlighting that ICE employees often have easily accessible LinkedIn profiles.

For Doe, DHS appeared to be attempting to test the limits of its authority by potentially unmasking online critics through a customs statute that permits subpoenaing information on goods crossing US borders.

On January 16, however, DHS suddenly reversed its decision, retracting its subpoenas from Meta.

A recent court document revealed that DHS had dropped its requests for subscriber information, which initially included demands for Doe's “postal code, country, all email address(es) on file, date of account creation, registered telephone numbers, IP address at account signup, and logs showing IP address and date stamps for account accesses.”

The court filing did not provide reasons for DHS’s change of heart.

Previously, DHS had sought similar information from Meta regarding six Instagram community watch groups sharing ICE activity details in Los Angeles and other areas. DHS withdrew these requests as well, following motions to quash from account holders defending their First Amendment rights, according to Doe’s court filing.

← Back to News