Homeland Security is trying to force tech companies to hand over information about Trump’s opponents

The Department of Homeland Security has been quietly demanding that tech companies hand over user data to critics of the Trump administration, according to reports.

In recent months, Homeland Security has relied on the use of subpoenas to obtain personal information about people who run anonymous Instagram accounts, which share posts about ICE immigration officials in their jurisdictions. These subpoenas are also used to demand information about people who criticize the Trump administration or oppose government policies.

Unlike judicial subpoenas, which are authorized by a judge after seeing enough evidence of a crime to authorize a search or seizure of another person’s property, administrative subpoenas are issued by federal agencies, allowing investigators to search for personal information from technology and cell phone companies without the supervision of a judge.

Although administrative subpoenas cannot be used to obtain information contained in a personal emails, web searches, or location datamay ask for information about the user, such as when the user logs in, from where, using which devices, and disclose email addresses and other personal information about who opened the online account. But because administrative subpoenas aren’t backed by a judge or court order, it’s up to the company to provide any information to the agency it wants.

Administrative subpoenas are not new; The use of personal records by Trump officials to obtain classified information about people who oppose the president’s policies has caused alarm.

Bloomberg report last week that Homeland Security searched for an anonymous Instagram account called @montocowatchwhich says its purpose is to share resources to help protect the rights of immigrants and the right process across Montgomery County in Pennsylvania. The move comes amid the ongoing immigration crisis in the United States, which has sparked protests and widespread criticism. Attorneys for Homeland Security sent a subpoena to Meta demanding that it provide information about the person who ran the account, citing a non-Homeland Security employee who said they received a tip that ICE agents were being hacked.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the owner of the account, said there was no evidence of wrongdoing and that filming the police, sharing the footage, and doing so anonymously is legal and protected under the First Amendment. Homeland Security he withdrew his complaint without giving an explanation.

The ACLU called the subpoena “part of a broader strategy to intimidate people who document immigration issues or oppose government actions.”

Bloomberg reported that efforts to unmask the @montcowatch account were not unusual, citing four other cases in which Homeland Security officials used executive subpoenas to try to identify people with Instagram accounts that posted content critical of the government. These subpoenas were also withdrawn after the account holders filed to block the test.

Technology companies in recent years have published transparent reports detailing the amount of government demand they receive. But most do not specify how many judicial and administrative subpoenas they receive over time, even though the two types of subpoenas are essentially different.

When asked by TechCrunch, Meta spokesman Francis Brennan did not say whether Meta had given Homeland Security anything about @montcowatch or whether the company had been asked to provide the account information in another way.

A new report of The Washington Post Tuesday found that an administrative subpoena had also been used to seek information from Google about an American who retired within hours of sending a critical email to Homeland Security attorney general Joseph Dernbach. The retiree’s home was later visited by law enforcement agencies inquiring about the email.

The Post described the retiree as an anti-Trump figure during his first term, who attended the No Kings rally last yearhe regularly attends meetings and protests, and writes criticisms of lawmakers, all actions protected under the First Amendment.

Within five hours he sent an email to the Homeland Security attorney – who was named in the story about the story of an Afghan man whom the US wants to deport and whose email is listed on the website of the Florida Bar – the retiree received an email from Google, according to The Washington Post. An email informed him that his account had been compromised by the Department of Homeland Security.

The warrant sought to know the date, time, and duration of all his online sessions, his IP address and address, and a list of every service he used, and any other logins and information about his account, such as credit card, driver’s license, and Social Security numbers.

Two weeks later, Homeland Security agents were at his door, questioning him about an email he sent to Dernbach, which agents agreed was not illegal.

Google spokeswoman Katelin Jabbari told TechCrunch that the company is pushing back against unusual or inappropriate calls, “as we did here,” referring to the subpoena cited in The Washington Post’s report.

When asked by TechCrunch, Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Tricia McLaughlin did not say why the US wanted information about people who have been critical of the Trump administration and accounts documenting ICE activities, or say why the subpoenas were withdrawn.

“HSI has broad authority under 8 USC § 1225(d) and 19 USC § 1509(a)(1) to issue subpoenas,” McLaughlin said, referring to Homeland Security Investigations, an investigative unit within ICE.

Not all companies are able to provide information about their customers. For example, information that is encrypted end-to-end and can only be accessed when you find someone’s phone or device. That said, many companies can provide information about users, including where they log in, how they log in, and from where, which may allow researchers to identify anonymous accounts.

End-to-end messaging apps, such as Signal, have long promoted the amount of data they collect about their users. The messaging app responds to legal requirements from time to time by stating that it does so unable to extract user data that it doesn’t have to start at all.

Reliance on US tech giants is another reason European countries and ordinary consumers want to place less trust in American technology giants, at a time when senior executives and senior leaders at major US technology companies are closely aligned with the Trump administration.