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
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Log In

Create new account

First Amendment

ICE Spent $525 Million on Surveillance Tech. Some of It Is Infringing on Americans' Freedom of Speech.

New details emerge regarding the Trump administration's surveillance dragnet cracking down on its online critics.

Autumn Billings | 8.7.2026 4:37 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
DHS Doxxing 1 | Photo: Piksel/Martinmark/MinervaStudio/Edhardream/Dreamstime. Illustration: Fatima Ruiz
(Photo: Piksel/Martinmark/MinervaStudio/Edhardream/Dreamstime. Illustration: Fatima Ruiz)

Since the beginning of President Donald Trump's second term, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has spent over $525 million on surveillance technologies, including millions in private contracts to "dramatically expand the agency's ability to monitor online critics and potential threats," according to a Wall Street Journal report published on Monday. The report has revealed more details about the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) emerging surveillance dragnet used to track, unmask, and prosecute critics of ICE, and its chilling effect on Americans' constitutionally protected speech. 

Many of the contracts the report cites are part of an initiative headed by ICE's Office of Professional Responsibility where contractors are asked to compile daily reports on potential online threats, including information such as "the poster's name, location, date of birth, workplace, Social Security number, vehicle registration and criminal history when possible," writes the Journal. This information is collected by monitoring social media sites, public documents, and police reports "to identify and map key relationships of users who have been flagged as a 'threat originator,'" and analyzed via AI-powered software to identify "potential threats before they come to fruition."

The DHS claims such broad and sweeping data collection is necessary to defend agents from doxxing, and told the Journal that "these efforts are focused on credible threats of violence directed against the ICE workforce." 

But First Amendment advocates argue that the agency's threat barometer is set too high. And instead of focusing on true threats, a form of unprotected speech where the speaker expresses serious intent to commit violence against a person or group, the DHS has used this information to intimidate Americans who've expressed their constitutionally protected opinions on matters of public concern. 

In one such case previously reported by Reason, ICE attempted to identify an anonymous Reddit user who goes by the name Tired_Thumb through an administrative subpoena seeking the user's name, address, phone number, length of service, and I.P. addresses. Reddit notified the user of the request, who obtained counsel and challenged the unmasking subpoena in federal court. And although ICE withdrew its subpoena, federal prosecutors soon escalated to a grand jury subpoena in April. 

"As far as I can tell, all of this is about people saying naughty things about ICE and immigration enforcement," Lauren Regan, the attorney representing Tired_Thumb, told the Journal. "Nothing that comes close to true threats." 

Tired_Thumb's Reddit posts, reviewed and published in part by the Journal, include such threatening sentiments as "ACAB" for "all cops are bastards" and "abolish ICE and erase all borders." One post was in response to a different post claiming to have identified the ICE agent in a viral video who helped drag a potentially pregnant woman in Minnesota, providing the publicly available phone number associated with that name. These posts, although controversial to some, express Tired_Thumb's opinions on immigration enforcement policy, a matter of ongoing public debate, and are strongly protected under the First Amendment. 

Even still, a judge denied Tired_Thumb's motion to quash the grand jury subpoena last month, but granted a motion to stay the case pending appeal, reports the Journal. 

Tired_Thumb is far from the only one facing infringement on freedom of speech since the expansion of ICE's surveillance dragnet, which "has investigated at least 131 incidents of doxxing and threats…between January 2025 and March of this year," according to the Journal. Some individuals whose identities have been successfully obtained by federal agencies have been tracked down and visited by federal officers and asked to sign documents claiming their posts regarding immigration enforcement activity may have violated federal law. But in many cases, criminal charges aren't being filed, making it difficult to challenge the federal government's activity in court, Regan told the Journal. "If they just want to use this as an intimidation tactic, it's not even a fair fight." 

There's a lot more to learn about the federal government's growing surveillance apparatus and how it may or may not infringe on Americans' right to uninhibited, robust, and wide-open public debate under the First Amendment. But so far, the DHS and ICE have failed to respond to requests for public records regarding any database used to track or unmask critics of the Trump administration's immigration policies, making it difficult to ensure constitutional compliance.

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: The White House's Push To Pause the Hemp Ban Smells Like Cronyism

Autumn Billings is an assistant editor at Reason.
First AmendmentFree SpeechTrump AdministrationDepartment of Homeland SecurityICECivil LibertiesSocial MediaAnonymitySurveillance
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (43)

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. Rick James   2 months ago

    You're going to have to prove to me that anyone, anywhere at any time has made any serious threats to ICE agents or Trump, let alone acted on them.

    1. Fu Manchu   2 months ago

      Rights are for government, not the people. And the government exists to protect itself. That's why it's okay if the government spies on everyone for its own safety.

      1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

        You dont have a right to enter other countries sarctard.

        1. Fu Manchu   2 months ago

          And that justifies violating everyone's rights. Because if they catch just one illegal...

          1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

            You dont have a right to enter another's country sarc. The violations youre pretending to care about are speculative. And its ironic as you cheered rights being violated for trump, his lawyers, and J6ers and even congress.

            1. Fu Manchu   2 months ago

              ICE spying on everyone and showing up at citizens' doors for their online posts is just violating illegals' rights.

              1. Templeton Ferrari the 3rd (The Commentariat member formerly known as SCOTUS)   2 months ago

                Illegals have very limited rights here Sarc Fu. The right to privacy is not among them.

                Now don’t you have a half gallon of Evercleat to drink?

                1. Fu Manchu   2 months ago

                  What does ICE showing up at *citizens'* doors have to do with illegals, retard?

                  1. Templeton Ferrari the 3rd (The Commentariat member formerly known as SCOTUS)   2 months ago

                    “…….. is just violating illegals' rights“

                    You’re the one who said “illegals”, drunk ‘retard’.

            2. Wizard4169   1 month ago

              Speculative? It's documented fact, you mendacious twatwaffle. Enter another county? Have a big steaming mug of STFU. We're talking about agents of the US government intimidating US citizens who have done precisely nothing illegal.

        2. Wizard4169   1 month ago

          Bullshit deflection from Jesse? I'm shocked, shocked I say!

      2. Rick James   2 months ago

        Exactly! Now you get it!

      3. Mickey Rat   2 months ago

        Government employees should not have rights?

        1. Wizard4169   1 month ago

          They shouldn't have special rights that no one else does. When people are criticizing you for you behavior in public, just maybe you're doing something wrong. When you use illegal means to intimidate people who have committed no crimes, you're definitely doing something wrong.

    2. Jack Jordan   1 month ago

      Rick, the government must prove all facts that are material to showing a "true threat" not a "serious threat." As SCOTUS emphasized in Counterman v. Colorado in 2023, "the First Amendment" necessarily "requires proof that the defendant had some subjective understanding of the threatening nature of his statements." At the very least, the government must prove "that the defendant consciously disregarded a substantial risk that his communications would be viewed as threatening [actual physical] violence."

  2. Templeton Ferrari the 3rd (The Commentariat member formerly known as SCOTUS)   2 months ago

    The default here is to assume anything Little Autumn writes is a lie unless proven otherwise.

    1. damikesc   1 month ago

      The default here is to both do that AND not read her bilge.

    2. Wizard4169   1 month ago

      That might mean something if it came from someone who isn't a known shit sack of lies.

  3. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

    Illegals cost 120B a year.

    1. Fu Manchu   2 months ago

      Source: lies

      1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

        10 years and youre still intentionally retarded.

        1. Templeton Ferrari the 3rd (The Commentariat member formerly known as SCOTUS)   2 months ago

          He’s barely trying. He must be super shitfaced already.

        2. Wizard4169   1 month ago

          So is it better if you're unintentionally retarded? Not that I believe you are. No one can reach your level without hard work.

      2. Templeton Ferrari the 3rd (The Commentariat member formerly known as SCOTUS)   2 months ago

        No Sarc Fu, YOU are the liar. Amd you will anything to throw the border open and keep every illegal here. Even the rapists and murderers,

        So die, your kind has no place in my country.

        1. Wizard4169   1 month ago

          Damn! I didn't know you could stack that much shit in one place.

          1. Templeton Ferrari the 3rd (The Commentariat member formerly known as SCOTUS)   1 month ago

            What shit, faggot? Sarc Fu is a well known proponent of open borders. He is on record for being against any and all deportations. Including rapists and murderers.

            Are you a Sarc sock, faggot? Or just another stupid communist democrat? Either way, kill yourself.

      3. chemjeff radical individualist   2 months ago

        No, it's not a complete lie, but it is highly misleading. For example, in that figure that Jesse loves to quote, includes the cost of law enforcement itself against illegal immigration. So Jesse blames "the illegals" for the cost of their own arrest. He never points that out, of course.

        1. Bananas   2 months ago

          Why the hell wouldn't you include the cost of enforcing immigration laws when calculating the cost of illegal immigration?
          WTF is wrong with you?

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

            Jeff is dumb.

          2. damikesc   1 month ago

            Don't think there are enough available bytes in the world to catalog that.

          3. Wizard4169   1 month ago

            Easy, numbnuts. A whole hell of lot of the money spent on "enforcement" is blatant waste. ICE can spend $50K to wrap a truck, but they can't afford $150 body cams. They waste dog only knows how much money on "detention centers" so they can hold people who pose little or no threat to anyone in brutally inhumane conditions. If you think that's a good use of tax dollars, then I give up. I can't think of a word sufficiently obscene to describe that.

            1. Templeton Ferrari the 3rd (The Commentariat member formerly known as SCOTUS)   1 month ago

              They’ve had their work cut out for them since you cunts spent four years letting an extra 20 million border jumpers into my country.

              So again, go kill yourself.

      4. Wizard4169   1 month ago

        Liars gotta lie. Fuck the truth if gets in the way of the agenda.

        1. Templeton Ferrari the 3rd (The Commentariat member formerly known as SCOTUS)   1 month ago

          Yes, we know a dumb commie cunt like you has to lie.

  4. Templeton Ferrari the 3rd (The Commentariat member formerly known as SCOTUS)   2 months ago

    Any state that gives welfare to illegals should be stripped of 100% of federal funding.

    1. jabbermule   1 month ago

      Exactly. And every single "sanctuary" city and state should also be stripped of all federal funding...but it hasn't been done. What was the fucking point of voting for Trump if he wasn't going to do this on 1/21/25?

      1. Wizard4169   1 month ago

        For what? The law is clear. State and local authorities can't legally interfere with the feds, but the feds can't draft them to do their jobs for them either. It's called "federalism". Learn it, live it, love it.

        1. Templeton Ferrari the 3rd (The Commentariat member formerly known as SCOTUS)   1 month ago

          You’re welcome to say that all you want, from a cage. Which is where you belong.

        2. jabbermule   1 month ago

          A "sanctuary city" is in direct conflict with federal law. Federal laws have pre-eminence over state and local laws. The Civil War settled that argument 161 years ago.

          I'll let you try to figure it out from there, but let me know if you need help connecting the dots. I have some crayons for you if that will make it easier.

      2. Normal Guy   1 month ago

        Without funding, taxes are mere tribute, representation, mere words. The people will not accept that and there will be conflict. The country may not recover.

        The only people interested in that are our enemies. Are you an enemy of the United States?

        1. jabbermule   1 month ago

          Did the southern states receive federal funding after they seceded in 1861? Yeah, I didn't think so.

  5. Jack Jordan   1 month ago

    "Some individuals" were "asked to sign documents claiming" they "may have violated federal law." Cf. Amendment V: "No person" can "be deprived of life" or any "liberty" or any "property" until after being afforded all "process of law" that is "due." Part of the process of law that is due was specified immediately before those words: no person can "be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself."

  6. Moo Cow   1 month ago

    So interesting to see the commenters at a libertarian site carrying water for the police state in thread after thread.

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

Flock's Gunfire Alerts Raise a New Fourth Amendment Question

Del Schlangen | 9.22.2026 8:00 AM

Biden's Team Wanted War in the Middle East Without Owning It

Matthew Petti | 9.22.2026 7:30 AM

Brickbat: Unclipped

Charles Oliver | 9.22.2026 4:00 AM

Judge Blocks Warrantless ICE Construction Site Raids After Agents in Alabama Arrested a U.S. Citizen 3 Times

C.J. Ciaramella | 9.21.2026 3:24 PM

Trump Takes Page From Leftist Playbook With $5,000 Dividend Proposal

Agustina Vergara Cid | 9.21.2026 1:35 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • 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.

Reason's July 4 Special!

For America's 250th, Get 2 Years of Reason for $17.76

Celebrate your independence with a subscription to Reason magazine, your most trusted source of honest, insightful news and analysis.

Subscribe to Reason