Federal Judge Rules DOJ and DHS Likely Violated First Amendment by Coercing Tech Firms to Censor ICE-Tracking Platforms

A federal judge ruled on Friday that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) likely violated the First Amendment by coercing Apple and Facebook to remove platforms used for sharing information about Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations.

The ruling came in a lawsuit filed in February against former Attorney General Pam Bondi and former Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) accused both officials of "repeatedly threaten[ing] to prosecute individuals and entities for disseminating information…about ICE operations," in violation of free speech rights. Though both women have since left office, the lawsuit has continued against their successors.

Platforms Targeted for Removal

The complaint named two plaintiffs whose platforms were removed after DOJ outreach last fall:

• Kassandra Rosado, creator of the Facebook group "ICE Sightings – Chicagoland", which had nearly 100,000 members.
• Kreisau Group, LLC, creator of the app "Eyes Up", used to document immigration enforcement activities.

Both platforms shared videos and information about ICE operations, which are protected under the First Amendment.

Government Threats Preceded Removals

The takedowns followed public threats from Bondi and Noem. In July 2021, Noem threatened to prosecute CNN for reporting on the app ICEBlock. Bondi also warned the app’s creator on Fox News, stating, "[They] better watch out." By early October, apps including Eyes Up and ICEBlock were removed from the Apple App Store, and "ICE Sightings – Chicagoland" was taken down from Facebook.

Private Companies or Government Coercion?

While the government is barred from restricting speech, private companies like Apple and Facebook can enforce their own content policies. However, the complaint noted that neither company had cited specific violations or warned of imminent shutdowns before the removals—only after the DOJ’s involvement.

Following the Facebook group’s removal, Bondi publicly celebrated the DOJ’s role, accusing the group of "doxing" and targeting ICE agents. She also pledged to "continue engaging tech companies to eliminate platforms where radicals can incite imminent violence against federal law enforcement."

Judge Finds Evidence of Government Coercion

According to FIRE, Bondi and Noem’s statements conveyed an implicit threat: if Apple and Facebook failed to suppress the speech, the government could take legal action. United States District Judge Jorge L. Alonso agreed, ruling that the plaintiffs’ injuries were "likely traceable to government-coerced enforcement."

"Although Bondi and Noem's statements may not be direct threats to prosecute Facebook and Apple, they are intimations of a threat. And thinly veiled threats such as these constitute sufficient evidence on which Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim."

As a result, Alonso granted FIRE’s request for a preliminary injunction to block the DOJ and DHS from further coercing tech companies to suppress protected speech.