Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • Freed Up
    • The Soho Forum Debates
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

First Amendment

The Feds Used Threats To Silence Their ICE-Tracking Speech. Now They're Fighting Back.

A lawsuit argues that Pam Bondi and Kristi Noem coerced Apple and Meta to censor two popular ICE-monitoring tools, which violates Americans' right to freedom of expression.

Autumn Billings | 2.13.2026 11:40 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
FIRE lawsuit plaintiffs and Pam Bondi and Kristi Noem | Crescent Peak Photography/Michael Brochstein/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom/AdMedia/SIPA
(Crescent Peak Photography/Michael Brochstein/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom/AdMedia/SIPA)

When the Trump administration's immigration crackdown began last year, several entrepreneurs and concerned citizens established support groups and apps to track the movement of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. These efforts were quickly squelched by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Kristi Noem and Attorney General Pam Bondi, who are now facing a lawsuit as a result.

The federal lawsuit, filed this week by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Expression (FIRE), argues that both Noem and Bondi have "repeatedly threatened to prosecute individuals and entities for disseminating information…about ICE operations," a violation of Americans' right to freedom of expression.

Such threats began last July, when the Trump administration condemned CNN for reporting about an app called ICEBlock, which used crowdsourcing to track ICE activity, and accused such platforms of endangering the lives of immigration officers. After officials called for CNN to be investigated, Noem told a reporter, "We're working with the Department of Justice to see if we can prosecute [CNN] for that, because what they're doing is actively encouraging people to avoid law enforcement.…We're going to actually go after them and prosecute them." Bondi also threatened prosecution when she told Fox News that the creator of ICEBlock "better watch out."

By early October, tech companies began removing apps like ICEBlock and Eyes Up—which was founded by Kreisau Group LLC, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit—from their app stores. With Eyes Up, users were able to document and preserve evidence of government abuses of power by uploading and archiving pre-existing videos, live recording and uploading new content, and viewing videos uploaded by others. 

Even though Americans have the right to record public law enforcement activity and to share those recordings, Apple yielded to Bondi and Noem's demands by removing Eyes Up from the Apple App Store last year. The company cited guideline violations for the removal, but according to the complaint, such violations had not been previously mentioned. FIRE argues that "Apple reasonably understood Bondi and Noem's course of conduct to convey a threat of adverse government action against Apple in order to suppress Kreisau Group's speech," in violation of the First Amendment. 

After coercing Apple, Bondi and Noem moved on to Meta, Facebook's parent company. In mid-October, Bondi took credit for the removal of a popular Facebook group called "ICE Sightings – Chicagoland," which was started by Kassandra Rosado, the second plaintiff in the case. Even though Meta cited guideline violations for the removal, Bondi openly bragged in an X post that "outreach" from the Justice Department is what truly led to the removal of the social media group, according to the lawsuit. She also accused the group of doxing and targeting ICE agents, and vowed she would "continue engaging tech companies to eliminate platforms where radicals can incite imminent violence against federal law enforcement."

But Rosado didn't create the social media group to incite violence, but to keep her community safe and informed, according to FIRE. As a small business owner and U.S. citizen of Mexican descent living in the Chicago area, Rosado launched the group to share information, including photos and videos, of nearby ICE operations. 

Rosado's group grew rapidly after reports circulated about ICE's use of excessive force—including two ICE-involved shootings—and arrests of citizens and legal immigrants alike amid "Operation Midway Blitz," the federal immigration crackdown in Chicago, last fall. By October 2025, the group had nearly 100,000 members, many of whom used the page's shared information to safely avoid areas where ICE was active. Others used the group to voice their opinions about ICE's tactics. 

Although both Apple and Meta cited guideline violations for the removals of Eyes Up and "ICE Sightings – Chicagoland," neither company, according to FIRE, signaled that these platforms were in danger of being shut down before the Justice Department made its "outreach." Both instances involve government officials unconstitutionally using their position of power to coerce private companies to do what the federal government cannot: suppress the protected speech of Americans. 

More unsettlingly, these actions target political opinions that disagree with the Trump administration's immigration policies. Although officials have denounced the existence of ICE-sighting groups for posting operation details and endangering the lives of officers, neither Bondi nor Noem has threatened to prosecute social media accounts that share videos and photos of operations in a pro-ICE way—including ICE's own social media accounts. 

The First Amendment protects Americans from government actions that abridge free speech, which includes the right to report and share information about law enforcement. By taking credit for successfully jawboning Apple and Meta into complying with its unconstitutional demands, the government has, by extension, taken credit for violating the constitutional rights of Americans.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: DOJ’s Antitrust Chief Resigns Amid Accusations of Corruption Among Top Officials

Autumn Billings is an assistant editor at Reason.
First AmendmentFree SpeechImmigrationTrump AdministrationDepartment of Homeland SecurityCivil LibertiesCoercionAppleFacebookDepartment of JusticeLawsuitsFederal CourtsICE
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (16)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)   2 hours ago

    …coerced Apple and Meta to censor two popular ICE-monitoring tools,

    Are we certain it wasn’t just “jawboning “?

    Log in to Reply
    1. rswallen   1 hour ago

      It is funny to see almost everyone switch sides on whether jawboning is acceptable depending on which President is doing it.

      Log in to Reply
      1. Fu Manchu   9 minutes ago

        Don't come here for principled libertarian stances because you won't find many.

        Log in to Reply
  2. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 hours ago

    These are the sites that also worked with foreign groups to provide training on how to impede ICE, including up to physical impedement, no? Used to have a word for that.

    Are these sites responsible for misidentification of drivers and citizens not associated with ICE as well? Or does that not matter?

    Log in to Reply
    1. Fu Manchu   8 minutes ago

      Note your weasel words. "Worked with" - how? "Training" - is training illegal? "Misidentification" - are mistakes illegal? What here justifies jawboning? Oh yeah right, your guy is king so the government can do no wrong. Faggot

      Log in to Reply
  3. Incunabulum   2 hours ago

    I thought it was just private companies doing what they choose to do that just happens to be exactly what the government wants them to do?

    Log in to Reply
  4. Social Justice is neither   1 hour ago

    So are we going to see the same rejection of anti-stalking and harassment laws, or is it only ICE and their families you think are valid targets for harassment and harm?

    Log in to Reply
  5. DesigNate   1 hour ago

    They were doing a fair bit more than “tracking” ICE movements. And their fail/success rate for harassing non-ICE agents is higher than ICE’s fail/success rate for mistakenly detaining US citizens.

    But I guess a massive surveillance state is fine as long as it’s the private sector.

    Log in to Reply
    1. Fu Manchu   11 minutes ago

      Rights are for the government, not the people. That's why it's okay for ICE to work with Flock to track everyone, but it's not okay for the public to track the government.

      Log in to Reply
  6. Rick James   1 hour ago

    A lawsuit argues that Pam Bondi and Kristi Noem coerced Apple and Meta to censor two popular ICE-monitoring tools, which violates Americans' right to freedom of expression.

    Now roll the clock back 6 years and literally FUCK YOUR OWN FACE!!! re-do ALL of your fucking COVID coverage.

    Log in to Reply
    1. Fu Manchu   11 minutes ago

      If that's a Les Grossman reference, I dig it

      Log in to Reply
  7. Gaear Grimsrud   58 minutes ago

    Yeah users of these apps are setting up autonomous zones and threatening anyone attempting to use a public roadway. Also rioting at hotels and Target stores. They explicitly train users in confrontation AKA incitement to violence. Both of the individuals killed by Ice agents in Minneapolis were affiliated with these or similar organizations. Sorry Autumn. No sympathy from me.

    Log in to Reply
  8. Vernon Depner   45 minutes ago

    There is no First Amendment right to interfere with and obstruct law enforcement operations. People go to jail for that every day and the courts are OK with that. There is no right to keep people "safe" from being detained by law enforcement—that is specifically illegal. There is no right to harass, follow, and threaten people in the streets—we have laws against street harassment and stalking. There is no right to incite imminent violence against targeted individuals—the courts have specifically ruled that that is an exception to freedom of speech.

    Log in to Reply
    1. Fu Manchu   12 minutes ago

      The apps don't in and of themselves do any of that. Your justification for banning the apps could be used to ban just about anything because people could use pretty much anything in illegal ways.

      Log in to Reply
  9. TrickyVic (old school)   14 minutes ago

    Maybe Apple and Meta don't really want a role in promoting government obstruction.

    Log in to Reply
  10. Fu Manchu   13 minutes ago

    It's only free speech if you agree with the president.

    Log in to Reply

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Ring Drops Controversial Partner After Super Bowl Ad Backlash

Joe Lancaster | 2.13.2026 2:10 PM

The Cowardice of the Republican 'Tariff Skeptics'

Eric Boehm | 2.13.2026 1:30 PM

The El Paso Drone Scare Is the Future of National Security Paranoia

Matthew Petti | 2.13.2026 12:25 PM

Wuthering Heights Is a Kinky, Revisionist Fever Dream  

Peter Suderman | 2.13.2026 12:08 PM

The Feds Used Threats To Silence Their ICE-Tracking Speech. Now They're Fighting Back.

Autumn Billings | 2.13.2026 11:40 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2026 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!

Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.

Make a donation today! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks