No one should have to choose between speaking freely and protecting their immigration status. Yet that’s precisely the choice the Trump administration’s mass surveillance of online speech forces on noncitizens living in the U.S.
Last fall, we
sued
on behalf of three major labor unions to stop this surveillance program. And just this month, we won our first major ruling: A federal district court
denied
the government’s motion to dismiss our lawsuit. This means the case can move forward—a win for free speech and a critical step in protecting our First Amendment rights online. We’ve already explained why this is a
big deal
for our clients, so let's take a closer look at the court’s reasoning.
Our Lawsuit
Since taking power, the Trump administration has used AI and other automated tools to
broadly surveil
the social media and online speech of visa and green card holders, with the goal of identifying and punishing people who express views it opposes. The government is targeting a broad range of views, including
criticism of the
Trump administration
;
support for Palestine
or
criticism of Israel
;
“rationalizing or making light of”
Charlie Kirk’s murder; and anything nebulously
“hostile”
to American culture,
founding principles
,
“traditional American views,”
or
“our way of life.”
It has paired that surveillance with a public intimidation campaign. High-ranking officials have explicitly
threatened
to punish noncitizens for their online speech, then followed through with a series of terrifying viewpoint-driven enforcement actions.
This has led to a significant chilling effect on speech, not just for noncitizens, but also for their families, coworkers, and friends.
In response, three major labor unions—the United Auto Workers (UAW), the Communications Workers of America (CWA), and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT)—
sued
the Departments of State and Homeland Security alleging that this viewpoint-based surveillance p
… [more]
