DHS Tells Reporter That Filming ICE Officers ‘Sounds Like Obstruction Of Justice’

from the deliberately-wrong-about-the-law dept

ICE activity has increased exponentially since Trump’s return to office, bringing with it an exponential increase in rights violations committed by federal officers. Multiple lawsuits have been filed and, without exception, courts have safeguarded the rights of people to peacefully protest and document federal officers as they perform their duties.

Meanwhile, the people running DHS and its components continue to claim that merely recording officers is a criminal act. But it’s not. It’s protected by the Constitution whether ICE likes it or not. Under Trump, ICE and DHS are taking a bold new stance against recording officers, telling those with boots on the ground deliberately false things, like this:

[T]he guidance urges officers to consider a range of nonviolent behavior and common protest gear—like masks, flashlights, and cameras—as potential precursors to violence, telling officers to prepare “from the point of view of an adversary.”

Protesters on bicycles, skateboards, or even “on foot” are framed as potential “scouts” conducting reconnaissance or searching for “items to be used as weapons.” Livestreaming is listed alongside “doxxing” as a “tactic” for “threatening” police. Online posters are cast as ideological recruiters—or as participants in “surveillance sharing.”

That guidance was released to federal officers back in July. The rhetoric has only ramped up since then, with DHS officials publicly stating that they’re going to treat protected First Amendment activity as a crime. The responses delivered by these officials following this July reporting was indicative of their mindset:

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem told reporters in July that it was “violence” to be “doxing” and “videotaping them where they’re at when they’re out on operations.” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin reiterated the point in August that “videotaping ICE law enforcement and posting photos and videos of them online is doxing our agents.… And we will prosecute those who illegally harass ICE agents.”

A memorandum issued at the beginning of December provided guidance for DOJ prosecutors seeking to punish people for utilizing their constitutional rights. According to the memo, people who follow officers to observe, record, or protest their actions are to be treated as criminal obstructionists, if not as actual domestic terrorists.

When reached for comment on this memo by CJ Ciaramella of Reason, the DHS doubled down on its decision to treat this right as a crime:

In response to a question from Reason asking if the department considered following or recording a federal law enforcement officer to be obstruction of justice, the DHS Office of Public Affairs said in an emailed statement attributed to an unnamed spokesperson: “That sure sounds like obstruction of justice. Our brave ICE law enforcement face a more than 1150% increase in assaults against them. If you obstruct or assault our law enforcement, we will hunt you down and you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Filming or even being in the general area of federal officers engaged in their public duties isn’t “obstruction.” Neither is identifying officers — officers who, by the way, should be wearing stuff that makes them identifiable, rather than the blend of army surplus and balaclavas that further separates them from accountability.

And, of course, the DHS refers to that especially meaningless stat (“1150% increase in assaults”), as though that somehow justifies its decision to use the Constitution as a door mat. All that actually means is that there have been 115 more “assaults” as compared to 2024. Back when the DHS was touting its “690% increase in assaults” as an argument against preventing ICE officers from wearing masks, it was comparing 79 alleged assaults through the first six months of this year against the 10 that had been committed from January-June 2024.

That’s just an empty stat that allows DHS spokespeople to trot out a gaudy number that will grab eyeballs but otherwise just allows the MAGA-cooked to continue to pretend “Democrat cities” are being destroyed by violent anti-ICE protests.

Even if it were true that it’s exceptionally dangerous to be an ICE officer at this point in time, that doesn’t justify pretending the First Amendment simply doesn’t exist. Actual assaults are criminal acts. Filming federal officers who don’t want to be filmed definitely isn’t.

Filed Under: , , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “DHS Tells Reporter That Filming ICE Officers ‘Sounds Like Obstruction Of Justice’”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
45 Comments
BernardoVerda (profile) says:

Re: Apparently, filming ICE from one's own front porch is terroism.

Just saw a YouTube video this morning, in which a guy was assaulted and arrested on his own front porch, when he didn’t obey a fully kitted ICE “officer”s order to stop recording and to go inside — even while he was explaining that the order wasn’t legal and the ICE mercenary didn’t have that authority.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Strawb (profile) says:

Re:

Don’t block roads (yes, that’s obstruction, as are many other things)

Doesn’t justify murder.

If told to get out of your car, do so, or that’s resisting arrest.

ICE had no authority to arrest her, and it doesn’t justify murder even if they did.

If you drive in any way toward an officer, that’s assault with a deadly weapon

Good, because she was driving away from an officer.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
n00bdragon (profile) says:

Re:

Being in a road is a crime worthy of summary execution? Every command a cop gives is the law, and failure to instantly comply with all orders (no matter how contradictory) is a crime worthy of summary execution? Moving in the direction of a cop from any distance at any speed is a carte blanche for summary execution during and for some nebulous time frame after the motion has ceased or diverted?

Do you ever ask yourself if this qualifies as the “freedom” America is so famous for?

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

The funny thing is, they’re trying so hard to make it sound like there’s thousands upon thousands of assaults happening to ICE agents around the country. But if we assume for a moment that ICE agents were the victims of, oh, let’s say 10 assaults in the period before this “increase in assaults”, the percentage increase would still only amount to 115 assaults. It’s a lot like Trump’s math on reducing prices on drugs: The bigger the number, the more it’s bullshit.

And that also doesn’t get into what ICE considers to be an “assault” in this context. Is it actually being beaten by someone, or do hurt feelings count as well? 🙃

This comment has been deemed funny by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

You just don’t know what it’s like to walk the streets as an ICE agent. The person you’re walking by could pull out A PHONE and aim it at you. Some of these phones have FULLY AUTOMATIC recording with UNLIMITED DATA STREAMING plans.

And we’re not even talking about people in shadowy windows with zoom lenses. Last week I heard about an agent who was just minding their business, kicking in some 110 pound teenager’s head, when he saw the glint of a 700mm f/8 Canon aimed at him. Never saw the shot coming.

Dude had a wife and kids.

I mean, he still does. But he did, too.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re:

I don’t expect empathy from most people, but I do expect self-preservation.

You shouldn’t, if republicans had a working sense of self-preservation they wouldn’t keep voting for people that keep screwing them over. They vote for hate and suffering and the only time they demonstrate even a sliver of regret is when they personally are impacted, and even then so long as they believe someone they hate is suffering more they’re likely to consider it an acceptable price.

You (We, Us) says:

Math

“(“1150% increase in assaults”), as though that somehow justifies its decision to use the Constitution as a door mat. All that actually means is that there have been 115 more “assaults” as compared to 2024.”

No. What it means is that there are 11 and 1/2 times more assaults.
10 last year = 115 this year or 105 more
100 last year = 1 150 this year or 1 050 more.

Big difference between what is thought to be truth here and what reality actually is.

BernardoVerda (profile) says:

Re: Re: Some examples of how ICE commonly defines "assault" in official reports (listing not complete):

“They hit my fist with their face.”
“They stuck their neck between the ground and my knee.”
“They didn’t fall down the first time I shoved them.”
“They scratched my front bumper with the side of their car — repeatedly.”
“They bumped the rear of my vehicle with their vehicle when I brake-checked them.”
“They demanded to see a proper, signed, judicial warrant.”
“They were videoing our illegal actions.”

MrWilson (profile) says:

Re:

Numbers don’t matter if the definitions are loose or instances are fabricated. They claim assault to press charges even when no assault occurred. We’ve seen this in dismissed charges and failures of grand juries to indict in multiple jurisdictions. You’re memorizing shadows on the wall of Plato’s cave and pretending you know the truth.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...