ICE, DOJ Among 7 Federal Agencies Sued for Social Media Surveillance Records
The American Civil Liberties Union claims that seven government agencies violated the Freedom of Information Act in failing to turn over information regarding the monitoring of both U.S. 'citizens and noncitizens alike' via social media.
January 18, 2019 at 02:00 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
The American Civil Liberties Union has sued federal agencies for records related to their “social media surveillance activities.”
The ACLU lawsuit, filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, claims that the “failure” of seven government agencies to respond to a request for information pertaining to the “surveillance of social media users and speech” violates the Freedom of Information Act and raises concerns for freedom of speech and privacy of both “citizens and noncitizens alike.”
“Little information is available to the public on the tools and methods that defendants use to conduct surveillance of social media users and speech, or any policies and guidelines that govern such surveillance,” the complaint said. “Because the government's growing use of social media surveillance implicates the online speech of millions of social media users, U.S. citizens and residents of all backgrounds have an urgent need to understand the nature, extent, and consequences of that surveillance.”
The ACLU attributes the existence of surveillance records to “publicly available information,” including accounts of the Trump administration's increased monitoring of social media accounts of immigrants and visa applicants for “extreme” or “visa lifecycle vetting.” The complaint also points to a 2017 Department of Homeland Security report chronicling the trial of a task force that uses social media to screen individuals applying for immigration benefits. That report likewise noted that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)—one of the defendants in the ACLU suit—launched a pilot program as well as expanded social media screening for similar ends.
“It's clear that the federal government is ramping up its use of social media surveillance over the past several years with a focus in part on immigrant communities and communities of color,” Hugh Handeyside, an ACLU Foundation attorney listed on the complaint, said in an interview with The Recorder. “We saw a pretty urgent need for the public to have better perspective on any policies that may constrain them.”
The ACLU complaint said that in 2012, the FBI—one of the defendant agencies—looked to contractors for information on “a planned automated tool” with which the agency could “search and monitor information on social media platforms.” Likewise, the lawsuit indicated that the FBI in 2016 obtained “social media monitoring software that would give it full access to Twitter data.”
The lawsuit accuses every defendant agency of failing to respond to or reasonably search for records in accordance with a May 2018 FOIA request. However, Handeyside noted that the FBI “stands apart.”
“They came back with a Glomar response,” he said, noting the government “couldn't confirm or deny the existence of records.”
“That's a pretty aggressive move. The FBI is trying to go dark on its use of social media surveillance, but it's clear they engage in this kind of surveillance, and the public has a right to know about it,” Handeyside said.
The Department of Justice, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, USCIS and the Department of State didn't respond to requests for comment. Spokespeople for the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement declined to comment.
Matthew Cagle, a technology and civil liberties attorney at ACLU of Northern California, is also listed as an attorney bringing suit.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Ex-Starbucks GC Exiting Latest Role, Will Get Severance
- 2Family Law Special Section 2025
- 3We Must Uphold the Rights of Immigrant Students
- 4Orrick Picks Up 13-Lawyer Tech, VC Group From Gunderson Dettmer
- 5How Alzheimer’s and Other Cognitive Diseases Affect Guardianship, POAs and Estate Planning
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250