The Department of Homeland Security has been quietly demanding tech companies turn over user information about critics of the Trump administration, according to reports. In several cases over recent months, Homeland Security has relied on administrative subpoenas to seek identifiable information about individuals who run anonymous Instagram accounts. These accounts share posts about ICE immigration raids in their local neighborhoods. The subpoenas have also been used to demand information about people who have criticized Trump officials or protested government policies.
Unlike judicial subpoenas, which are authorized by a judge, administrative subpoenas are issued directly by federal agencies. This allows investigators to seek a wealth of information about individuals from tech and phone companies without a judge’s oversight. While these subpoenas cannot obtain the contents of a person’s emails or online searches, they can demand specific user information. This includes login times, locations, devices used, and the email addresses associated with an online account. Because administrative subpoenas lack a judge’s authority, it is largely up to the company whether to comply with the government’s request.
The use of these self-signed demands by Trump officials to seek information about people critical of the president’s policies has raised alarm. Last week, Bloomberg reported that Homeland Security sought the identity of an anonymous Instagram account called Montcowatch. The account states its goal is to share resources to help protect immigrant rights and due process in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. This occurred amid an ongoing federal immigration crackdown across the United States. Homeland Security lawyers sent an administrative subpoena to Meta, demanding personal information of the account owner. They cited a tip from a non-Homeland Security employee who claimed ICE agents were being stalked.
The American Civil Liberties Union, representing the account owner, said there was no evidence of wrongdoing. They stated that recording police, sharing that recording, and doing so anonymously is legal and protected under the First Amendment. Homeland Security later withdrew its subpoena without providing an explanation. The ACLU called the subpoena part of a broader strategy to intimidate people who document immigration activity or criticize government actions.
Bloomberg reported the effort to unmask the Montcowatch account was not an isolated incident. They referenced at least four other cases where Homeland Security used administrative subpoenas to identify people running Instagram accounts publishing content critical of the government. Those subpoenas were also withdrawn after the account owners sued to block the attempt.
Tech companies publish transparency reports detailing government demands for data. However, most do not distinguish between judicial and administrative subpoenas, even though the two are fundamentally different. When asked by TechCrunch, a Meta spokesperson did not say if the company provided Homeland Security any data involving Montcowatch. A new report by The Washington Post found an administrative subpoena was also used to seek information from Google about an American retiree. This occurred within hours of him sending a critical email to a Homeland Security attorney. The retiree’s home was later visited by federal agents inquiring about the email.
The Post described the retiree as someone critical of Trump, who attends protests and writes to lawmakers, actions protected under the First Amendment. Within hours of his email, Google notified him his account had been subpoenaed. The subpoena demanded his login details, IP address, physical address, services used, and other identifiable information like credit card or Social Security numbers. Two weeks later, Homeland Security agents visited him, conceding his email broke no laws.
A Google spokesperson told TechCrunch the company pushes back against overbroad or improper subpoenas, as they did in this instance. When asked, a Homeland Security assistant secretary would not say why the U.S. was seeking information about critics or why subpoenas were withdrawn. She stated that Homeland Security Investigations has broad administrative subpoena authority.
Not all companies can hand over customer data. Information that is end-to-end encrypted can only be accessed by obtaining a person’s device. However, many companies can provide large amounts of user information, such as login locations and methods, which can unmask anonymous accounts. End-to-end encrypted messaging apps like Signal respond to legal demands by stating they cannot produce user data they do not possess.
The reliance on U.S. tech giants for such data is another reason why European countries and ordinary consumers are seeking to rely less on American tech companies. This comes at a time when senior leaders at some of the largest U.S. tech companies are overtly cozying up to the Trump administration.