The United States government faces increasing scrutiny over its treatment of immigrants, particularly regarding their due process rights in immigration courts located in Manhattan. Recent revelations indicate that the FBI circulated a report to various law enforcement agencies, detailing the addresses of three Manhattan immigration courts. This targeted move, critics argue, represents a chilling pattern of criminalizing free speech efforts in support of the immigrant community.
In fairness, the FBI’s report was focused on just one individual. This individual participated in a debriefing session via an encrypted Signal group chat named “courtwatch.” In turn, this encrypted communication platform empowers activists. They’re utilizing it to increase transparency and combat unfair practices in immigration court hearings. Spencer Reynolds, a civil liberties advocate, noted that the U.S. government is increasingly turning national security agencies against individuals advocating for the rights of immigrants.
In September, the situation escalated dramatically. A federal law enforcement officer was seen in a viral TikTok video violently shoving a protestor to the ground outside a New York City federal courthouse. This incident in turn prompted a rare censure from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). It further brought to the forefront the increasing tensions between federal law enforcement and immigrant rights advocates.
Moreover, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has escalated its effort to trap immigrants by arresting them when they show up to regularly scheduled court hearings. This strategy has raised alarm bells. Many are concerned that the U.S. government may be indicating an opening salvo of a larger campaign to suppress leftist activism and dissent. In June, ICE arrested city official Brad Lander, New York City’s comptroller. He was standing, at the moment, in an immigration courthouse supporting an immigrant New Yorker.
Reynolds expressed concern over the chilling effect that such surveillance could have on activists:
“The US government is turning these powerful national security agencies towards critics and people who are standing up for the rights of immigrants, and while it’s so shocking to see something like this, it’s not surprising.” – Spencer Reynolds
Their “courtwatch” initiative continues to go above and beyond to offer independent, critical oversight for immigration courts. It serves as a check against unlawful detentions without due process. Since then, volunteers from multiple immigrants’ rights organizations around the country have been directly engaged in monitoring these hearings.
Reynolds pointed out that lawful activities like observing court hearings are often misrepresented by federal officials:
“These activities, and public access to our courts, are lawful and protected by our rights in the US constitution, yet routinely we’re seeing federal officials portray efforts to obtain basic accountability as threats.” – Spencer Reynolds
Given these circumstances, it’s no wonder that Tom Homan, White House border czar and former acting ICE director, recently called for defunding immigrant rights training. He suggested that these trainings could be seen as obstructing law enforcement efforts:
“know your rights trainings could be considered impeding law enforcement.” – Tom Homan
Dr. Ryan Shapiro, executive director of Property of the People, emphasized that civic engagement should not be equated with terrorism:
“Basic civic participation is not a terrorist threat.” – Dr. Ryan Shapiro
The FBI report presented a direct threat to members of courtwatch’s group chat. They might have even been misusing their offices by directing demonstration participants to carry out acts of terrorism on police officers in closed-door meetings. This depiction of civic engagement ignores our lawful and constitutionally protected right to protest and asks activists to trade their security for civil liberties.
With increasing calls to clamp down on government surveillance, activists monitoring immigration proceedings are now more at-risk than ever as they carry on this critical work. This isn’t the first time the FBI has shown interest in the communications of courtwatchers, indicating a desire to surveil dissenting voices in immigrant advocacy.
“The mission of courtwatch is to provide transparency and ensure people are not disappeared without due process – surveillance and intimidation by Trump’s corrupted Justice Department won’t stop us from showing up to protect our neighbors and the rule of law.” – Brad Lander
ICE’s latest strategies have some community members up in arms. They fear that simply going to a court hearing will lead to being picked up and detained. Judicial observers have decried these maneuvers as tainting the judicial process and deterring people from standing up for their rights.
Reynolds warned that ongoing surveillance could chill discussions within activist circles, thereby hampering vital exchanges that support advocacy efforts:
The overarching narrative reflects a government increasingly willing to employ national security resources against those advocating for marginalized populations. Critics argue that this approach resembles historical instances when federal authorities sought to infiltrate civil rights movements or surveil Muslim communities following the events of 9/11.
“There is a significant risk of chilling and undermining these sorts of private discussion environments.” – Spencer Reynolds
The consequences of these changes reach far past the direct immigrant rights sphere. Observers suggest that they raise fundamental questions about the boundaries of free speech and civic participation in the United States.
As pressure mounts on federal agencies to change their tactics, activists remain undeterred in their commitment to transparency and accountability within immigration courts. They are convinced that first-hand observation of court proceedings is an essential component to protecting the rights of immigrants. They characterize this act as lawful and non-violent.
As pressure mounts on federal agencies to change their tactics, activists remain undeterred in their commitment to transparency and accountability within immigration courts. They assert that observing court proceedings—an act they describe as legal and non-violent—is essential for protecting the rights of immigrants.