Over the past few months, social media and tech companies such as Google, Meta, and Discord have received legal demands from the Department of Homeland Security asking for personal information on users making negative posts about ICE or giving updates on the locations of ICE officers. These subpoenas seem to be setting a dangerous precedent when it comes to free speech and online anonymity.
As political tensions across the nation increase, especially since the murder of Renée Good and Alex Pretti at the hands of ICE agents, people have turned to social media as an outlet for their anger and a place to help others evade ICE. Homeland Security is now taking even more extreme measures in an attempt to crack down on these new trends.
In an article written by New York Times authors Sheera Frenkel and Mike Isaac, it is specified that Homeland Security is trying to accomplish their mission “by sending tech companies legal requests for the names, email addresses, telephone numbers and other identifying data behind social media accounts.”
Frenkel and Isaac go on to say that these subpoenas were fulfilled as “Google, Meta and Reddit complied with some of the requests.”
Homeland Security’s more aggressive actions towards anti-ICE citizens brings up concerns about personal privacy and First Amendment rights regarding freedom of speech.
When asked whether she thought Homeland Security should gain access to people’s personal information because of posts about ICE, Cadence Wright, a sophomore at Central High School, responded with a firm no. “Absolutely not,” she said. “We have the power of free speech and by restricting that [the] government is trying to completely take control, which […] is illegal and seems very authoritarian.”
Some people think politics and controversy should be kept offline; however, for many people, social media is an important platform for free speech and freedom of expression. Kate Flugge, a social studies teacher at Central, leans more towards the second point of view.
“I think free speech is guaranteed by our Constitution,” she said, “and people should be allowed to express their opinions on social media, in public forums, through protest, etc.”
With such aggressive actions being taken by a government agency, questions are being raised about why these things are being done, what benefit they will bring to the American people, and what they mean for the future of the United States. This is especially important when such actions bring into question the Constitutional rights of citizens.
The Department of Homeland Security was created after 9/11 terrorist attacks with the goal of preventing similar invasions in the future. Its website condenses the organization’s mission statement by saying, “as the complex threat environment continues to evolve and loom, the Department will embody the relentless resilience of the American people to ensure a safe, secure, and prosperous Homeland.”
Given this mission, the expectation is that Homeland Security will make decisions in the interest of national security and will only go to measures as extreme as invading personal privacy when it is necessary for the safety of the masses. However, not everyone feels as though those guidelines are being followed as no large threat exists.
Wright’s opinion on the danger of anti-ICE social media posts was that “they’re not openly threatening people [or] the government and there is no reason for it to be a concern.”
Richard Morton, who teaches classes on government and media literacy at Central, concluded “the phrase ‘national security’ is being used as a guise to facilitate specific political gain.” He then went on to say that this tactic was “very un-american.”
Morton holds the view that people should be careful what they post publicly, but should not have to worry about private, direct messages. “Public posts are public. Things sent privately should not be accessed. Especially if it will be weaponized for political gain.”
However, the legal action being taken by the American government does not mean people should hide in silence. As Wright put it, “they are trying to scare people into silence, so the best thing to do is to keep talking for those who can’t.”
