Lawsuit alleges DHS illegally used surveillance tools to target immigration observers and protesters under Trump

Three individuals who observed federal immigration enforcement during the Trump administration's immigration surge filed a federal lawsuit Friday, alleging that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) illegally recorded them and revoked their status in the department's trusted traveler programs.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, claims the administration violated federal privacy law, administrative law, and the First Amendment by targeting people who observed and protested aggressive immigration enforcement—including during a deadly operation in Minneapolis in January.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center, a legal group focused on technology-related privacy issues, is also a plaintiff in the case.

First Amendment Rights Allegedly Violated

Amid a nationwide surge of immigration enforcement that has included federal agents shooting and killing protesters, observers, and immigrants, opponents "did what anyone is supposed to do when they disagree with government action: They exercised their First Amendment rights" by assembling, protesting, and recording DHS agents' activity in public, the suit states.

"In response, DHS decided to record the Americans who were peacefully observing its agents," the suit alleges.

Officers with DHS agencies Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol killed two observers—Renee Good and Alex Pretti—in Minneapolis in incidents 17 days apart in January.

Surveillance and Intimidation Tactics

According to the lawsuit, ICE and Border Patrol agents used facial recognition technology, license plate readers, and other technology to identify protesters and observers. Agents then used that information to intimidate and retaliate against protesters.

Federal immigration officers addressed many legal observers by name, despite having never spoken to them. In Minnesota, legal observers tailing DHS agents in a car would commonly be led back to their own home addresses, the suit says.

"The experience … is so widespread that Minnesota residents have coined a term for it: being 'driven home by ICE,'" the suit states.

Policy Violations Alleged

The practice shows that DHS is no longer following its own 2023 policy on facial recognition, the suit argues. The department quietly removed the policy from its website—omitting it even from archived pages—during President Donald Trump's first month back in office, the suit says.

The complaint argues this amounted to a policy change that DHS did not conduct through the process required under the Administrative Procedure Act.

Retaliation Through Trusted Traveler Programs

The department also retaliated against protesters and observers by revoking their status in DHS trusted traveler programs, including TSA PreCheck and Global Entry, the suit alleges.

Nicole Cleland, a Minnesota woman and one of the individual plaintiffs, said her Global Entry status was revoked three days after an encounter with a Border Patrol agent whom she was following at a safe distance, according to the suit.

Chilling Effect on Rights

The suit alleges DHS's actions have had a chilling effect on First Amendment-protected activity.

Cleland has stopped observing DHS operations for fear of further retaliation, according to the suit.

The two other individual plaintiffs—Jacquelyn Ivey of South Carolina and Anna Walker of California—said they experienced "fear, anxiety and emotional distress" following their interactions with DHS officers.

The suit also references activity in Maine, North Carolina, and Chicago.

DHS Response

In response to a request for comment, a spokesperson for Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which administers Global Entry, said trusted traveler status can be denied for "inability to demonstrate low-risk traveler status."

"Global Entry or other CBP Trusted Traveler Program memberships are not revoked because someone exercises their First Amendment rights," the spokesperson wrote. "Membership may be denied or revoked for reasons such as criminal activity (including pending charges or warrants), violations of customs or immigration laws, or inability to demonstrate low-risk traveler status."

The spokesperson added that travelers whose Global Entry is denied or revoked can request additional review.