SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
surveillance
Lawsuit Challenges Trump's Illegal Spying and Retaliation Targeting ICE Monitors
“The federal government cannot build secret dossiers on people because they exercise their First Amendment right to peacefully observe, document, or criticize its actions," said the head of Democracy Forward.
Jul 24, 2026
A coalition of privacy and civil liberties advocates filed a federal lawsuit Friday accusing the Trump administration of secretly collecting and keeping personal information about people who monitor US Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations, arguing that the practice violates federal privacy law and threatens constitutionally protected speech and association.
The lawsuit—filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia—was brought by individuals and advocacy groups represented by Democracy Forward.
The plaintiffs—the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and legal observers Nicole Cleland, Jacquelyn Ivey, and Anna Walker—argued that the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and other federal agencies created and maintained databases of people who observed, documented, or protested immigration enforcement activities without providing notification or safeguards, as required under the Privacy Act of 1974.
That law was passed after the exposure of illegal government surveillance, including longtime former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director J. Edgar Hoover's infamous COINTELPRO program, under which the FBI, in addition to conducting unlawful spying, funded and armed murderous far-right militants to terrorize anti-Vietnam War protesters, anti-nuclear weapons activists, civil rights leaders including Martin Luther King, Jr., and other leftists.
“The federal government cannot build secret dossiers on people because they exercise their First Amendment right to peacefully observe, document, or criticize its actions," Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman said in a statement announcing the lawsuit. "That is exactly the kind of government surveillance Congress sought to prevent when it enacted the Privacy Act after some of the darkest chapters in our nation’s history."
The lawsuit accuses the Trump administration of collecting the names, photographs, vehicle information and license plate numbers, social media accounts, and other identifying information about legal observers, volunteers, journalists, clergy, and community members engaged in First Amendment-protected activities during the government's deadly anti-immigrant crackdown.
"When the Department of Homeland Security dramatically ratcheted up its immigration enforcement, people across the country—of all ages and backgrounds—did what anyone is supposed to do when they disagree with government action: They exercised their First Amendment rights," the suit states. "They peacefully protested. And, as matters here, they observed and recorded how law enforcement agents acted in public."
DHS is using facial recognition technology, body cameras, license plates, mobile devices, and other surveillance tools to identify, track, and punish people who legally observe immigration enforcement in public. This is a clear violation of the Privacy Act. We’ll see them in court.
[image or embed]
— Democracy Forward (@democracyforward.org) July 24, 2026 at 10:36 AM
"In response, DHS decided to record the Americans who were peacefully observing its agents, adopting a secret Protester Surveillance Policy enabling its agents to first collect records on Americans engaging in First Amendment exercise and then maintain them in DHS systems, where they can be used to retaliate against those Americans," the complaint continues.
"Beginning sometime in 2025, DHS deployed a dragnet of drones, bodycams, face-scanning apps, license plate scanners, and camera phones to, as one memo instructed, 'capture all images, license plates, identifications, and general information on hotels, agitators, protestors, etc., so we can capture it all in one consolidated form,'" the document notes.
"DHS agents have not been shy about gathering this information or its purpose," the plaintiffs contended. "In Maine, DHS agents told multiple observers that they were being added to a database of 'domestic terrorists.' In Chicago, agents routinely used facial irecognition scans on members of the public."
"In Minneapolis, observers simply watching agents on public streets have been led by those agents to their own houses, despite never having interacted with an agent—a practice so common that it has been named 'being driven home by ICE,'" the suit says. "And across the country, DHS agents have approached observers and addressed them by their full names, even though those observers never identified themselves to the agents or showed them any form of identification."
"As a result of its Protester Surveillance Policy, DHS has recorded and retaliated against each individual plaintiff," the filing alleges. "It’s bad enough that DHS publicly collected information on Americans engaged in lawful First Amendment exercise. But worse, DHS also decided to maintain the information in one or more of its systems, enabling it to later retaliate against observers and protestors—including by canceling Trusted Traveler status," which includes Transportation Security Administration Pre-Check and Global Entry.
The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare the DHS surveillance policy unlawful, end it, and ban the agency from continuing to collect and keep records of individuals’ protected First Amendment activities.
“Now more than ever, those of us who have the privilege to speak out have a responsibility to defend the rights of everyone in our communities,” Walker said in a statement. “When people are punished for exercising their First Amendment rights, we begin losing the democratic principles that protect all of us. Every American should be alarmed by retaliatory action against one’s free speech."
Cleland said: “I believe government accountability starts with transparency. People should be free to peacefully observe and document what their government does in public without worrying they’ll be tracked or retaliated against. This case is about protecting that right for everyone.”
EPIC deputy director John Davisson warned, “When our government compiles secret dossiers on everyday people for exercising their constitutional rights, it sends a chilling message: If you speak up, watch your back."
"If every protest, every recording, every act of dissent opens us up to surveillance and retribution, privacy and free speech are at risk of collapse," he added. "But the laws of this nation don’t permit that, and we won’t either.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
European Parliament to Debate Spyware After 'Brazen Targeting' of EU Lawmaker Who Probed Pegasus
Civil society groups and experts said that "the EU must act now to defend independent oversight, protect fundamental rights, and ensure that spyware abuse in Europe is met with accountability, not impunity."
Jul 06, 2026
The European Parliament narrowly voted Monday to hold a debate on spyware after recent revelations that the phone of Stelios Kouloglou, a Greek journalist and former member of the European Parliament, "was repeatedly hacked with NSO Group's Pegasus" while he sat on the body's committee investigating abuses of the technology.
The vote came amid a fresh wave of calls for action. Elina Castillo Jiménez, advocacy and policy adviser for Amnesty International's Security Lab, said in a Monday statement that "the brazen targeting of someone in his position underlines how inadequate the current system is, and is yet another wake-up call that the protections that were put in place to prevent this kind of abuse are still not being implemented in Europe."
"Three years ago, the European Parliament's PEGA Committee, on which Stelios Kouloglou sat, issued clear and detailed recommendations for how to close the gaps that allow this abuse to continue. We are still waiting for implementation. Delaying it sends the wrong message about impunity in the surveillance industry."
Castillo Jiménez argued that "European leaders must find the political will needed to protect people from spyware abuse. An independent and impartial investigation into this attack, together with a roadmap for implementing PEGA recommendations, is urgently needed. If an elected member of parliament is not safe from unlawful surveillance, then no one is."
Amnesty was also part of a Monday joint statement with individual experts and organizations including Access Now, Center for Democracy and Technology Europe, Committee to Protect Journalists, Reporters Without Borders, and more, calling out the European Union for failing "to deliver a meaningful, EU-wide response to the proliferation and abuse of commercial spyware."
Global calls for restrictions on surveillance technology have mounted since the Pegasus Project—an international media consortium led by the media nonprofit Forbidden Stories, with tech assistance from Amnesty—published a 2021 exposé of the Israeli firm's software that was developed to secretly infiltrate mobile phones.
Kouloglou, who left the European Parliament two years ago, was appointed to serve as a substitute member of its PEGA Committee on March 24, 2022. That October, his Apple iPhone was infected with the spyware, according to research released Friday by the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto in Canada.
The first documented hacking occurred while Kouloglou was at a hospital, where he was visited by Greek journalist Thanasis Koukakis—who, as the Citizen Lab explained, "has worked closely on mercenary spyware issues in Greece, has testified to the PEGA committee, and was himself targeted with Intellexa's Predator spyware."
The following March, as Kouloglou left Athens for Brussels, his phone was again infected with Pegasus. The lab noted that the second hacking happened as he and Koukakis were making tentative plans to meet over WhatsApp, "the PEGA Committee was engaged in intense discussions related to the final drafting process," and PEGA Rapporteur MEP Sophie in 't Veld was in Greece with another committee delegation that questioned Greek officials on the country's scandal involving other spyware.
The forensic analysis also found that "Kouloglou received multiple Apple threat notifications about targeting with mercenary spyware on three occasions: March 2, 2023, August 29, 2023, and April 10, 2024," the lab said. "It is important to note that threat notifications from Apple and other companies are not real-time alerts. They are typically sent to users in batches, often months or more after targeting takes place. Kouloglou reports to us that he did not recall receiving the Apple notifications we observed."
The Citizen Lab acknowledged that "we have no indications that this hacking was the work of the Greek government," though it does appear to be the same operator who targeted seven Russian- and Belarusian-speaking independent journalists and opposition activists based in Europe, whose experiences were detailed in its May 2024 joint report with Access Now.
Although there were some known cases of MEPs being targeted with Pegasus before the European Parliament's panel was created, the lab stressed, "this is the first time a member of the PEGA Committee has been publicly identified as a victim" of this particular spyware while serving on it.
Reuters reported that while NSO did not respond to requests for comment, Apple said the vulnerability referred to in the Citizen Lab report has been patched. The European Parliament told the news outlet that its spyware screening tools had been available to all lawmakers since 2022 and its information technology security services "constantly monitor cybersecurity threats as well as potential cyberattacks against its working environment."
However, that's not enough for critics like In 't Veld, who is also no longer an MEP and pointed out to Politico that hundreds of politicians, including European Parliament President Roberta Metsola, have been targeted by various tech.
"If attempts to target the phone of the president of the European Parliament, or members of the European Commission, does not trigger sufficient reaction, [and] is not enough to break the deadlock, then what is?" she asked
The coalition of groups and tech experts similarly said in their Monday statement: "These incidents all point to a structural failure to adequately and seriously respond to the spyware crisis in Europe. This latest revelation should be treated as a rule of law emergency, threatening the very foundations of our society."
"Europe cannot continue moving from scandal to scandal without consequence. The targeting of a member of the European Parliament involved in investigating spyware abuse should mark a turning point," the coalition said. "The EU must act now to defend independent oversight, protect fundamental rights, and ensure that spyware abuse in Europe is met with accountability, not impunity."
John Scott-Railton, a senior researcher at the lab, told The Guardian last week that "this case is the ultimate irony of Europe's spyware crisis. Someone on the very committee tasked with investigating Pegasus gets infected by it. And what has happened since? The parliament looks the other way when new European spyware abuses emerge."
"I can tell you how the next chapter will go: more hacked parliamentarians," he warned. "In fact, I suspect there are members voting and attending high-level meetings with no idea that their phone has been turned into a spy in their pocket."
Scott-Railton welcomed Monday's vote to hold a debate later this week, and listed some key questions on social media:
In addition to urging investigations by European Union institutions, the Citizen Lab recommended that other members and their staff immediately seek forensic screening of their devices, exercise vigilance for state-sponsored attack warnings, and enable Lockdown mode on iPhones and Advanced Protect for Android.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Get the Flock Out': Nationwide Backlash Grows Against AI-Powered Surveillance Tech
Since 2021, 82 Flock contracts have been canceled across 28 US states—39 of them during the first five months of this year alone.
Jul 03, 2026
Resistance is mounting across the United States against the increasing use of surveillance tech company Flock Safety's cameras, with a growing number of cities canceling contracts as the artificial intelligence-powered license plate readers are quietly being installed in thousands of locations nationwide.
State and local police departments first used the Atlanta-based company's automated license plate reader (ALPR) systems for standard law enforcement purposes, but they are now being employed for a much broader range of uses, including immigration-related searches and other actions supporting US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) during the Trump administration's deadly anti-immigrant crackdown.
“We have cameras that are used for everything from illegal dumping to drug houses to hotels that are just big problems,” Flock Safety engineer Kevin Cox told prospective customers during a demonstration of the company's Condor Camera, according to a Thursday report in The Washington Times.
“There are endless, endless uses for what we can do with these things," Cox added.
Those uses include spying on constitutionally protected protest activity and enforcing abortion bans by tracking pregnant people's travel across states—even ones in which the medical procedure is legal.
The ACLU—which recently launched a "Get the Flock Out" campaign to "fight creepy ALPR cameras"—says there are currently between 80,000 and 100,000 Flock devices installed nationwide that conduct more than 20 billion scans per month. More than 5,000 law enforcement agencies use the cameras, and some of them keep their locations a secret.
Automatic license plate readers track our every move and funnel our personal information into enormous databases that police can access to spy on us without a warrant.Surveillance company Flock Safety is the largest provider of these cameras — it's time we get all of them out of our communities.
[image or embed]
— ACLU (@aclu.org) June 28, 2026 at 11:15 AM
"Flock's ALPR cameras aren't like your normal traffic cameras," the ACLU explained. "This surveillance technology records and tracks every car that comes into view, and then an AI algorithm catalogs the make, model, color, license plate number, bumper stickers, and even scratches. This personal information is then uploaded into a nationwide database that any law enforcement agency with a Flock contract can search—with few regulations or oversight on how they use what they find."
The backlash against creeping state surveillance has even transcended the partisan divide.
“I think our country is in a kind of uniquely anti-surveillance environment right now, which is to say that, in a time where it seems there is nothing that is not partisan, opposition to government surveillance is nonpartisan," ACLU privacy and surveillance attorney Chad Marlow told The Washington Times on Thursday.
There is growing action—both legal and otherwise—to end the use of ALPRs across the country.
According to the public information project Ban Flock Cameras, 82 Flock contracts were terminated across 28 states between August 2021 and May 2026, with 39 of those cancellations occurring in the first five months of 2026 alone.
Even Amazon-owned Ring announced earlier this year that it would stop doing business with Flock Safety.
Susie O'Hara, a member of Santa Cruz, California's nominally nonpartisan City Council, told WBUR earlier this year that she grew increasingly concerned about local use of eight Flock cameras last year after learning that police were sharing data gleaned from the cameras with the company's national network without city officials' knowledge, a violation of state laws banning the practice.
O'Hara became increasingly convinced that Santa Cruz should cancel its Flock contract after an ICE agent fatally shot Renee Good, a US citizen, in Minneapolis in January.
"I have goose hbumps on my arms thinking about the absolute chaos that was happening in Minneapolis," she said. "And just the absolute insanity of what we were seeing... It was totally clear to me that we should in no way consciously be in this system at all—just no way."
Less than a week after Good's killing, the Santa Cruz City Council voted to terminate the city's Flock contract, becoming the first municipality in California to do so.
“For us, the threat to our civil liberties was greater than any benefit we could get from the flawed product,” Santa Cruz Mayor Fred Keeley told KQED at the time.
Chad Kemp, who represents District 32 on the nonpartisan Dane County Board of Supervisors in Wisconsin—which in April voted to stop funding two dozen cameras leased from Flock—told The Washington Times that “there’s a public safety issue here, but there is also a privacy issue."
"There are serious concerns about individuals who can be monitored without their knowledge, or if it is even constitutional or ethical to track people without a warrant," he added.
At the national level, US Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) and Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.) last year launched an investigation into the use of Flock cameras to track pregnant people across state lines for abortion care and to conduct unauthorized immigration enforcement operations.
Krishnamoorthi and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) have also urged the Federal Trade Commission to investigate Flock Safety "for failing to implement cybersecurity protections, allowing Americans’ personal data to be exposed to hackers, criminals, and spies to steal."
Their demand came after the cybersecurity firm Hudson Rock revealed that hackers stole passwords and data from at least 35 Flock customer accounts.
In May, US Reps. Jesús "Chuy" Garcia (D-Ill.) and Scott Perry (R-Pa.) introduced a bipartisan amendment to a bill that would prohibit state and local governments receiving federal highway funds from using ALPRs for purposes other than electronic toll collection.
It's not just Flock. Axon, Vigilant Solutions—a subsidiary of Motorola Solutions—Genetec, PlateSmart, Innova Systems, Rekor, ELSAG, Perceptics, Jenoptik, and other firms market ALPRs to law enforcement agencies, private companies, and others.
"It doesn't matter which company has its creepy cameras in your neighborhood," the ACLU said, "they all have the same problems: a lack of transparency, oversight, and regulation into how they collect, store, and use our data, and how to hold public and private actors accountable if they abuse it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
US News Outlet Sues Trump Admin Over Refusal to Release 'Secret List of Activists'
“The government is not allowed to selectively hide information about its actions that impact protected First Amendment activity,” said a member of the legal team representing The Intercept in its legal challenge.
Jun 24, 2026
The progressive US media outlet The Intercept filed a lawsuit on Wednesday seeking to compel the Trump administration to hand over documents related to claims by federal officials of a secret database used to track protesters and others dubiously deemed "domestic terrorists."
The Intercept is asking the US District Court for the Southern District of New York to force the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to release material sought via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request it filed on February 23.
“It’s not illegal to monitor the activity of immigration agents inside your community,” Intercept editor-in-chief Ben Muessig said on Wednesday. “What is illegal is the US government’s secret list of activists—and its refusal to turn over information about that database to the American public.”
The Intercept's FOIA request came amid mounting evidence that, "by using photos, video, license plates, hotel check-in information, and more to create a database of lawful protestors, the government may be taking concerning action affecting the rights of those exercising their First Amendment rights," as plaintiff's counsel Democracy Forward noted in a statement announcing the lawsuit.
The Intercept's complaint cites a video posted on social media on January 23 that shows a federal immigration agent telling a legal observer in Maine during a protest against the deadly US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) anti-immigrant crackdown that "we have a nice little database, and now you’re considered a domestic terrorist."
According to the lawsuit:
In a court hearing regarding immigration enforcement actions in Minnesota, attorneys for the state of Minnesota reportedly included an exhibit of a recording of a federal agent saying, “Well, this person is gonna have a hard time traveling from now on" after taking a photo of an ICE observer's license plate. The press has reported that “a memo sent earlier this month to agents temporarily assigned to the city asked them to ‘capture all images, license plates, identifications, and general information on hotels, agitators, protestors, etc., so we can capture it all in one consolidated form.'"
Democracy Forward noted that "in a separate court case, a civilian observing ICE submitted a declaration stating that her [Transportation Security Administration] PreCheck and Global Entry were revoked three days after an encounter with immigration enforcement officials."
"Additionally, at least one prominent supporter of transgender rights has reportedly had her Global Entry and US passport canceled in the past few months," the group added.
Not included in the lawsuit are remarks made by White House "border czar" Tom Homan during a January interview with Fox News, during which he said that he aimed to “create a database where those people that are arrested for interference, impeding, and assault" and "make them famous.”
Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman said Wednesday, "The government is not allowed to selectively hide information about its actions that impact protected First Amendment activity."
"The surveillance and retaliation being reported would be egregious violations of core constitutional principles," she added, "and we are honored to represent a storied news organization as it fights to demand the public have access to the information we need to protect our democracy.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump’s New 'Counterterrorism' Strategy Is a Sweeping Attack on Domestic Dissent
The administration is using national security as a pretext to target protesters, civil rights groups, and vulnerable communities. Here is how we fight back.
May 15, 2026
On May 6, 2026, the Trump administration released its latest conspiracy-laden attack on “the left,” this time in the form of a “counterterrorism strategy". While laughably lacking in evidence or regard for laws, the “strategy” will have serious, deadly consequences. It sets our country’s counterterror apparatus and racist, anti-Muslim goals against the Global South, Europe, and all those here at home who have the nerve to demand their rights and oppose full-fledged autocracy.
In this post, I will focus on the domestic implications, although the global impacts are both frightening and impossible to fully separate, as the strategy conflates everything from domestic resistance movements to people with disfavored ideologies to drug trafficking with international terrorism.
The strategy is authored by Sebastian Gorka, a known anti-Muslim bigot whom former counterterrorism officials pan as “ill-informed” and a “huckster.” It should come as no surprise, therefore, that this so-called “strategy” is basically a cocktail of fearmongering and post-9/11 playbook, but on steroids. It incorporates and expands on the president’s National Security Presidential Memorandum-7, which casts a sweeping set of dissenting views as (domestic) terrorism, plays up fears of a “new alliance” between leftists and “Islamists,” and completely ignores the documented threats of right-wing and white supremacist extremists.
This is all hauntingly familiar. For generations, federal agencies have surveilled, monitored, and targeted Black, immigrant, Muslim, Middle Eastern, Asian, Indigenous, and other people of color, using surveillance as a tool of intimidation and enforcement that deepens racial inequities instead of making people safer.
Communities that have historically borne the brunt of government overreach will once again suffer the greatest harm. But this sweeping attack on dissent affects everyone, threatening the foundations of our free society.
For example, the strategy promises to wield massive law enforcement, surveillance, and other counterterror powers to “map” and "neutralize" groups it describes as "anti‑American, radically pro‑transgender, and anarchist." In the post-9/11 era, the New York Police Department attempted to map all Muslims and their institutions in the Tri-State Area, for which Muslim Advocates, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and Gibbons P.C. successfully sued in 2012. We have long seen our community and sacred spaces violated by informants and oppressive surveillance.
The document also states that the US government will "[i]dentify terror actors and plots before they happen,” (emphasis added) which sounds dystopian, but is the same false logic underlying the notorious Countering Violent Extremism program that targeted American Muslims in the post-9/11 era.
In Gorka's reported comments to the press, he doubled down on targeting "ideology” and preventive policing: “We see a threat… we will crush it, whether it is the cartels, the jihadists, or violent left-wing extremists like antifa and like the transgender killers, the non-binary, the left-wing radicals.”
These practices have caused lasting trauma and generational impact for Muslims, stifling our religious and political expression and wrecking intra-community trust. Now the government is wolfishly expanding while few seem to notice. Gorka himself said, “We are moving so fast, they just can’t keep up with us, which is delicious.”
A Sweeping Attack on Dissent
Indeed, the breadth of attacks on protesters, dissenters, and civil rights organizations is overwhelming. A few examples:
- This administration slandered Renee Good and Alex Pretti as domestic terrorists after its own officers shot each of them dead in broad daylight, contravening overwhelming bystander and video evidence.
- Prairieland case: Eight anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) protesters were convicted of material support for terrorism; raided; and had their flyers, zines, and use of encrypted chats cited in the indictment as evidence of their connection to terrorism.
- “Domestic terrorist” database: In January, an ICE officer told a legal observer, “[W]e have a nice little database, and now you're considered a domestic terrorist." When pressed at a congressional hearing, acting ICE Director Todd Lyons denied that a database of American “domestic terrorists” exists, but in a subsequent hearing, former Attorney General Pam Bondi refused to deny it.
- In late April, federal prosecutors indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has documented violent white supremacists for decades.
Communities that have historically borne the brunt of government overreach will once again suffer the greatest harm. But this sweeping attack on dissent affects everyone, threatening the foundations of our free society.
What can we do?
Make noise: Call attention to the harms of this counterterror “strategy.” Its release during congressional recess let it fly under the radar, although Ranking Member of House Homeland Security Committee Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) noted its lack of strategy and called again for a hearing with officials. Other elected officials should likewise take action to condemn this latest attack on dissent, demand transparency about its implementation and adherence to the Constitution, and protect our rights.
Congress also has an immediate opportunity to curb vast surveillance powers enabled by Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Section 702. Congressional leadership has so far blocked bipartisan efforts to pass a warrant requirement for searches of people in the US, and before accessing our intimate details through data-broker purchases. Lawmakers have until June 12 to enact basic protections for people in the US. This counterterror strategy—along with the recent whispers of its potential use against right-wing dissenters from Trumpism—shows exactly why we must urgently rein in the government's massive counterterror arsenal, starting with 702’s warrantless spy power.
Demand that local governments refuse to cooperate with the federal government, divest and remove surveillance technology, and withdraw from Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTF’s), which deputize local law enforcement to do the feds’ bidding and share information pursuant to its permissive interpretations of federal law.
Collectively, we must continue to demand our rights: to protest, to speak, to commune, and to live free from Big Brother—especially Big Brother with a gun. Remember: The overwhelm we feel isn’t an accident; it’s tactical. Refuse to allow the administration’s intimidation tactics to succeed. Our mass, unapologetic refusal to comply, is what’s truly “delicious.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Following Pattern Set by Venezuela and Iran Assaults, US Surveillance Flights Off Cuba Surge
The Trump administration has conducted more than two dozen surveillance and reconnaissance flights off Cuba's coast since early February, according to CNN.
May 11, 2026
US surveillance and reconnaissance flights off the coast of Cuba have surged in recent months as President Donald Trump has issued increasingly belligerent threats to seize the island nation by force.
CNN reported Sunday that the US Navy and Air Force have conducted more than two dozen surveillance flights—mostly of them near Havana and Santiago de Cuba, the country's largest cities—since early February, after the Trump administration invaded Venezuela and kidnapped its president. The outlet noted that "similar patterns, in which ramped-up rhetoric by the Trump administration coincided with an uptick in publicly visible surveillance flights, occurred in the lead-up to US military operations in both Venezuela and Iran."
"The flights are notable not only for their proximity to the coast, which puts them well within range of gathering intelligence, but for the suddenness of their appearance—prior to February, such publicly visible flights were exceedingly rare in this area—and for their timing," CNN reported.
CNN published its story days after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced new sanctions targeting a conglomerate operated by Cuba's military and a natural resources firm, intensifying the United States' decades-long economic war against the island nation.
"Our people already know the cruelty behind the actions of the US government and the viciousness with which it is capable of attacking us," Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel said in response to the sanctions. "They understand, just as the rest of the world does, that this is a unilateral aggression against a nation and a population whose sole ambition is to live in peace, masters of their own destiny and free from the pernicious interference of US imperialism."
In a New York Times op-ed on Monday, US Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Jonathan Jackson (D-Ill.) wrote that the Trump administration's "blockade of fuel to Cuba, on top of the longest embargo in modern US history, defies the norms of international law that provide for state sovereignty, nonintervention in domestic affairs and the right of nations to trade freely."
"It amounts to an economic assault on the basic infrastructure of Cuba, designed to inflict collective punishment on the civilian population by manufacturing a humanitarian crisis in which healthcare, running water, agriculture and transportation are no longer available," wrote Jayapal and Jackson, who visited Cuba in April and witnessed firsthand the devastating impact of US economic warfare.
"During our visit, we spoke with a wide range of Cuban citizens—political dissidents, religious leaders, entrepreneurs, and members of civil society organizations and humanitarian aid groups," the Democratic lawmakers wrote. "We also met with the families of Cuba’s political prisoners. Everywhere, there was agreement: America’s blockade must end, and a US invasion must not take place."
Trump has repeatedly threatened a military assault on Cuba in the months since his administration illegally attacked Venezuela and abducted its president.
"Cuba is next, by the way," Trump declared at a Saudi-backed investment summit in Miami in late March. "Pretend I didn't say that, please."
Citing unnamed US officials, The Associated Press reported last week that the Trump administration "is not looking at imminent military action against Havana" as the two sides continued to negotiate a diplomatic agreement.
AP added that the administration officials cautioned "that Trump could change his mind at any time and that military options are still on the table."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Maryland Becomes First US State to Ban Surveillance Pricing for Groceries
A new law will ban retailers from using shoppers' personal data to hike grocery prices—but consumer advocates warn it contains loopholes that companies could exploit.
Apr 27, 2026
Maryland will become the first US state to outlaw "surveillance pricing" for groceries after Democratic Gov. Wes Moore signed a bill on Monday barring retailers and food delivery services from using customers' personal data to alter prices.
The practice has already become rampant in online commerce, with companies like Amazon, Uber, and Delta Air Lines accused of using everything from browsing history and location to demographic information to squeeze every possible cent from consumers.
The Protection from Predatory Pricing Act, which takes effect in Maryland beginning on October 1, targets the growing use of such tactics by grocery chains and delivery apps, which Moore has accused of using "new technologies to drive up the bill for working families."
These include electronic shelf labels, which advocates have warned could allow companies to instantly change grocery prices based on the time of day, weather, and other factors that influence consumer demand.
“Digital price tags are replacing paper ones. It’s happening because we are having cameras that are watching aisles, it’s happening because we have apps that are moving from search-based to predictive,” Moore said.
Moore has cited an investigation published in December by Consumer Reports and the Groundwork Collaborative, which found that Instacart was running a “pricing experiment” that charged some customers as much as 23% more for the same items than others based on shoppers' personal data.
Another investigation by Consumer Reports last May found that Kroger was collecting lengthy profiles of individual customers, including estimates of their household size, education level, income, and even perceived "loyalty" to the company, along with sometimes dozens of other pages of personal data.
"Surveillance pricing can drive up the price of food," said Grace Gedye, senior policy analyst at Consumer Reports. "Retailers have a lot of data about individual shoppers: how often we search for or hover over particular items, whether we live near competitor stores, inferences about our likes and dislikes, our dietary needs, our income, our family size, and more."
"Surveillance pricing," she said, "allows companies to take advantage of that information asymmetry and charge you as much as they think you’re individually willing to pay.”
To combat this, Maryland's new law requires that shelf prices remain steady for one full business day. It also bars retailers from using surveillance data, such as inferred income, ethnicity, family size, neighborhood, or purchasing history, to raise prices for individuals.
Companies that violate the law will receive civil penalties of up to $10,000 for first offenses and $25,000 for repeat offenses. They will also be given 45 days to correct violations before these fines apply.
Gedye said, "While it’s encouraging to see the Maryland Legislature take up this issue, this law has loopholes that will limit its real-world impact."
The law faced fierce opposition from industry groups, including the Maryland Retailers Alliance. The group ultimately withdrew its opposition, but only after several new provisions were introduced that Consumer Reports said "undercut" the law's effectiveness.
While the law bans the use of personal data to set higher prices, the group said there is no way to determine what constitutes a "baseline or standard price," meaning price fluctuations could easily be marketed as discounts. It also said companies could use loyalty and subscription programs—which are exempt from the law—to raise prices.
The group also warned that the law is too hard to enforce, since only the Maryland attorney general, not customers themselves, can bring suits, which it said is a "departure from Maryland’s primary consumer protection law."
Many other states—including California, New York, and Illinois—are considering similar bans, and legislation has been proposed at the federal level to outlaw surveillance and surge-pricing practices nationwide.
Gedye said, "We urge other state legislatures considering personalized pricing legislation to build in stronger consumer protections and avoid loopholes that weakened this bill.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Uses Correspondents' Dinner Shooting to Justify Expanding Spying Powers as Deadline Nears
Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is set to expire Thursday, and the president is claiming Saturday's shooting proved "the safety of our nation" depends on the program.
Apr 27, 2026
An exchange of gunfire between an armed suspect and law enforcement outside the White House Correspondents' Dinner on Saturday came days ahead of a deadline for extending far-reaching government surveillance powers, and President Donald Trump wasted no time in claiming that the attempted attack on the event proved that the FBI must be permitted to spy on Americans without obtaining warrants.
In an interview with Fox News Sunday, Trump repeated his previous remarks that he is "willing to give up [his] security" in favor of extending Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which is set to expire on Thursday—and suggested other Americans should do the same for "the safety of our nation."
Section 702 allows US intelligence agencies to surveil the electronic communications of foreign nationals overseas without a warrant. Since some of the nearly 350,000 foreign nationals whose communications have been collected under the law are in touch with Americans, Section 702 allows for the collection of emails, text messages, and phone calls of US citizens.
Fox anchor Jacqui Heinrich emphasized that "we don't know right now" whether the suspect in Saturday's shooting, Cole Tomas Allen, "was radicalized" by a foreign individual or group, but asked whether the attack drove home "the importance of having these tools to protect our country from these kinds of threats."
The president responded by complaining that former FBI Director James Comey used FISA to obtain warrants to surveil a former Trump aide as part of the agency's investigation into the 2016 Trump presidential campaign's communications with Russia, before saying FISA has been used in the US-Israeli war on Iran and in the US military's invasion of Venezuela earlier this year.
"It's really needed for national security," said Trump. "Iran is decimated, and we got a lot of information by using FISA... I'm willing to give up my security for the military because ultimately that's to me the highest cause is, you know, the safety of our nation."
Pres. Trump, under prodding from Fox News, exploits White House Correspondents' Dinner shooting to push for Congress to approve FISA domestic spying program: "It's really needed for national security…"
He reiterates that he's willing to give up his liberties for safety. pic.twitter.com/tmcepp0Wgn
— Chris Menahan 🇺🇸 (@infolibnews) April 26, 2026
Jordan Liz, an associate professor of philosophy at San José State University, wrote last week in a column at Common Dreams that while Trump, Republican lawmakers, and US intelligence agencies "make sweeping claims about the terror attacks that Section 702 has prevented, there is little publicly available evidence to support this."
"According to the Cato Institute, there is only one well-documented, independently corroborated case of Section 702 preventing a terrorist attack on American soil: the 2009 New York subway bombing plot," wrote Liz. "In that case, Section 702 was used by the [National Security Agency] to track an exchange between an al-Qaeda courier and Najibullah Zazi, who was living in the US. The NSA passed this information to the FBI, which identified Zazi and disrupted the attack before it took place. Importantly, however, the NSA allegedly received the courier’s foreign email address from the government’s British intelligence partners. At best then, this success was a byproduct of productive intelligence sharing between allies. Rather than proving the necessity of Section 702, this incident underscores how Trump’s inane attacks against key US allies undermine our national security."
The suspect in Saturday's shooting is believed to have acted alone, and no evidence has been released that he was in communication with any foreign entities. A document he wrote alluded to his Christian beliefs and to reports of the administration's abuse of immigrants in detention centers, its boat-bombing operations in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, and the bombing of an elementary school in Iran.
The president has been pushing in recent weeks for an extension of Section 702. The program was last reauthorized in 2024, and earlier this month two efforts to extend the program—one for 18 months and the other for five years—failed, with opponents objecting to a lack of privacy reforms and to a loophole allowing data brokers to sell private information about Americans to government agencies that have not obtained judicial approval to seize the data.
After those proposals failed, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) last week unveiled a new bill to extend Section 702 for three years and require the FBI to submit monthly reports on its reviews of Americans' private data to an oversight official, as well as imposing penalties for abuse—provisions that were dismissed by privacy advocates.
The House Rules Committee was set to convene on Monday, a step toward advancing the new bill toward a vote in the House, and according to NPR, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) circulated a memo late last week urging his colleagues to reject the Republicans' latest proposal.
The bill, he wrote, "continues the disastrous policy of trusting the FBI to self-police and self-report its abuses of Section 702 and backdoor searches of Americans' data... FBI agents can still collect, search, and review Americans' communications without any review from a judge."
Four Democrats in the House—Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Tom Suozzi (D-NJ), Marie Gluesencamp Perez (D-Wash.), and Jared Golden (D-Maine)—broke with the party and joined the GOP earlier this month in supporting a procedural vote to advance the reauthorization of Section 702, and privacy advocates are ramping up pressure on them to oppose the latest proposal for an extension.
"It all comes down to those four and where they are going to land,” Hajar Hammado, a senior policy adviser at Demand Progress, told The Intercept Monday, “and if they are going to continue to try to hand Trump and [White House homeland security adviser] Stephen Miller warrantless surveillance authorities without any sort of checks or reforms that make sure they’re not violating civil liberties.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Congress Must End Warrantless Spying Program
Trump is more than willing to risk your rights and privileges for the sake of the America he desires. For a petty narcissist obsessed with revenge, section 702 of FISA is another dangerous and powerful tool for furthering his authoritarian agenda.
Apr 24, 2026
On April 17, Congress voted to pass a brief 10-day extension of section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA. This sets the new expiration date for April 30, 2026.
Section 702 was added to FISA in 2008 with a provision that requires Congress to periodically reauthorize it. The measure allows national security agencies like the National Security Agency (NSA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to collect and monitor—without a warrant—any electronic communications sent to and from non-US persons “reasonably believed to be located” outside the US. Notably, Americans who send messages to people abroad may likewise have their data surveilled.
Law enforcement agencies have consistently abused this loophole to spy on US citizens in clear violation of their Fourth Amendment rights. The Brennan Center for Justice reports that, in recent years, the government has conducted warrantless “searches for the communications of 141 Black Lives Matter protesters; 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign; members of Congress; multiple US government officials, political commentators, and journalists; and tens of thousands of Americans engaged in ‘civil unrest.’”
Even President Donald Trump alleges being a victim of these “backdoor searches.” Ahead of the last renewal vote in April 2024, Trump posted on Truth Social, “KILL FISA, IT WAS ILLEGALLY USED AGAINST ME, AND MANY OTHERS. THEY SPIED ON MY CAMPAIGN!!! DJT.”
The Trump administration perfectly encapsulates the dangers that section 702 presents to the American public and the wider international community. Far from preventing terrorism, section 702 enables it.
Since returning to the White House, however, his tone has notably shifted. On April 15, Trump posted that Republicans must “UNIFY” to pass a “clean extension of FISA 702.” He continues, “While parts of FISA were illegally and unfortunately used against me in the Democrats’ disgraceful Witch Hunt and Attack in the RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA Hoax, and perhaps would be used against me in the future, I am willing to risk the giving up of my Rights and Privileges as a Citizen for our Great Military and Country!”
Trump’s strong endorsement of section 702 is unsurprising. His administration has actively worked to undermine the rights and protections the Constitution guarantees. This includes: (i) subpoenaing social media sites to turn over the personal data of users who have criticized Immigration and Customs Enforcement; (ii) actively exploring a proposal to detain US citizens and deport them to prisons in El Salvador; (iii) violating states’ rights by threatening to cut funding to sanctuary cities as well as commandeering state and local officials to do the federal government’s bidding; (iv) working to disenfranchise voters via the election-rigging SAVE America Act; and (v) his administration’s efforts to restrict birthright citizenship, among many other examples.
Trump is more than willing to risk your rights and privileges for the sake of the America he desires. For a petty narcissist obsessed with revenge, section 702 is another dangerous and powerful tool for furthering his authoritarian agenda.
Already, Trump is actively exploiting section 702 to advance his illegal wars. On April 14, he posted, “Our Military desperately needs FISA 702, and it is one of the reasons we have had such tremendous SUCCESS on the battlefield, both in Venezuela and Iran.” These ‘successes’—or more accurately, war crimes and violations of international law—include kidnapping Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro; assassinating Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei; and inciting a reckless war of choice that has seen the US and Israel deliberately target schools, hospitals, and residential buildings.
The Trump administration perfectly encapsulates the dangers that section 702 presents to the American public and the wider international community. Far from preventing terrorism, section 702 enables it.
To be clear, however, the reasons for ending section 702 go beyond the Trump administration. First, the measure undermines the very rationale for FISA. FISA was enacted in 1978 following the revelations of widespread warrantless surveillance under the Nixon administration. This included not only the infamous Watergate scandal, but also spying on anti-war protesters and civil rights activists under the guise that they were linked to foreign communist groups. FISA requires intelligence agencies to obtain authorization for electronic surveillance and other investigative actions. It also establishes the FISA court to oversee requests for surveillance warrants.
Section 702 bypasses these safeguards. Once the government collects a target’s data, the FBI and other agencies can search through it to find Americans’ phone calls, text messages, and emails without a warrant or approval from the FISA court. Section 702 allows the government to engage in the very kinds of Nixonian abuses FISA was designed to prevent.
Keeping in line with Trump’s interests, Johnson’s proposal would permit the federal government to continue its assault against the American public and the global community unimpeded.
In fact, section 702 originally grew out of a secret warrantless surveillance program authorized by the Bush administration following the 9/11 attacks. The New York Times exposed the Terrorism Surveillance Program (TSP) to the public in 2005, triggering a wave of lawsuits. In 2006, Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ruled that TSP violated FISA and the Constitution. Despite this, as the American Civil Liberties Union notes, “Congress weakened FISA in 2007 and then again in 2008 to permit the warrantless wiretapping that the law had previously prohibited.” Instead of shutting down Bush’s unconstitutional program, Congress effectively codified it.
Second, and relatedly, section 702 cannot be meaningfully reformed precisely because the measure is antithetical to FISA itself. In 2023, amid another FISA renewal debate, then-FBI director Christopher Wray told Congress that he was “especially concerned” about a proposal that would require the government to obtain a warrant or court order before accessing information obtained using section 702. He remarked that, “A warrant requirement would amount to a de facto ban, because query applications either would not meet the legal standard to win court approval; or because, when the standard could be met, it would be so only after the expenditure of scarce resources, the submission and review of a lengthy legal filing, and the passage of significant time.”
This makes sense. After all, the entire point of section 702 is to authorize a warrantless surveillance program. A warrant requirement would effectively render it useless.
More modest attempts at reform have been proposed and even implemented. The 2024 Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA), for instance, introduced a few provisions aimed at restricting backdoor searches. Yet, within a few months, the FBI was already violating those new requirements. While the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) contends that RISAA has led to a steep decline in backdoor searches, the reality is that the FBI failed to track all such queries in 2024 and 2025. Whether RISAA has had any real impact is thus unknown. That said, even if a decline occurred, RISAA—and similar proposals—would still have failed at solving the fundamental problem: prohibiting warrantless government surveillance and mass data collection.
This is the dilemma reformists face: A warrant requirement is a “de facto ban,” but any other form of restrictions will, at best, only lessen the number of people whose constitutional rights are violated.
The proposed three-year extension unveiled by Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) on April 23 is no better. It includes minimal new oversight and penalties for abusing the spy program, but no warrant requirements. As Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) remarked: “Instead of ending warrantless surveillance or creating more transparency about government spying, this bill only requires a few more Trump administration officials to check a box. That always leads to more abuses, not less.” Keeping in line with Trump’s interests, Johnson’s proposal would permit the federal government to continue its assault against the American public and the global community unimpeded.
Third, while Trump and the CIA make sweeping claims about the terror attacks that section 702 has prevented, there is little publicly available evidence to support this. According to the Cato Institute, there is only one well-documented, independently corroborated case of section 702 preventing a terrorist attack on American soil: the 2009 New York subway bombing plot. In that case, section 702 was used by the NSA to track an exchange between an al-Qaeda courier and Najibullah Zazi, who was living in the US. The NSA passed this information to the FBI, which identified Zazi and disrupted the attack before it took place. Importantly, however, the NSA allegedly received the courier’s foreign email address from the government’s British Intelligence partners. At best then, this success was a byproduct of productive intelligence sharing between allies. Rather than proving the necessity of section 702, this incident underscores how Trump’s inane attacks against key US allies undermine our national security.
Congress should end section 702 and shift their focus to implementing more meaningful guardrails and oversight to FISA. At a time when constitutional rights are under unprecedented threat, Congress must act in the best interest of the public. While there’s still time, I urge everyone to contact their representatives and express their opposition to extending section 702.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Shameful': Outrage Over UK Universities Hiring Security Firm to Spy on Pro-Palestinian Students
"We knew surveillance was happening by the university, but it is shocking to see how systematized it is," said one student.
Apr 20, 2026
A dozen universities in the UK are facing criticism after a joint investigation by Al Jazeera English and Liberty Investigates revealed they hired a security firm run by former military intelligence agents to spy on pro-Palestinian student demonstrators.
Specifically, Al Jazeera English and Liberty Investigates reported they have "uncovered evidence that Horus Security Consultancy Limited trawled through student social media feeds and conducted secret counterterror threat assessments on behalf of some of Britain’s most elite institutions," including the University of Oxford, Imperial College London, University College London.
The investigation found that Horus has been paid $594,000 by the universities since 2022, and it has been asked to monitor targets ranging from a Palestinian academic giving a guest lecture at Manchester Metropolitan University to entire groups of pro-Palestinian organizations at the University of Bristol.
Many of the universities implicated in the investigation declined comment. Imperial College London, however, denied that it paid Horus to spy on its students, and said it merely wanted to "help identify potential security risks to its community, which might include protest activity within the vicinity of its campuses."
This rationale failed to satisfy critics, however.
Gina Romero, the United Nations special rapporteur for freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, told Al Jazeera English and Liberty Investigates that “the use of AI to harvest and analyze student data under the guise of open-source intelligence raises profound legal concerns.”
Romero expressed particular concern that Horus is not accountable to any public scrutiny, and that students have no way to know how the data collected from them will be used in the future.
Lizzie Hobbs, a PhD student at the London School of Economics who has taken part in pro-Palestinian protests, said it was "deeply scary" to see universities invest money in surveilling their own students.
"We knew surveillance was happening by the university," she said, "but it is shocking to see how systematized it is."
Jo Grady, general secretary for the University and College Union, slammed the schools' "shameful" actions and said they had "wasted hundreds of thousands of pounds spying on their own students."
Journalist Mushahid Hussain Sayed also described the universities' actions as "shameful," adding that they discriminated "against students and academics on the basis of their peaceful political beliefs/activism in support of Palestine and against Israel!"
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy