A New York man named David Streever sent a critical email to the then-head of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), leading to purported intimidation tactics that have now resulted in a new federal lawsuit.
Roughly five months later and after returning from an overseas vacation with his 5-year-old daughter, the Rochester man found out that ICE agents were staking out his New York City hotel.
It prompted a federal lawsuit filed July 6 by the nonprofit free speech organization Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) in the District of Columbia on First Amendment grounds, claiming that ICE and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that oversees the agency are engaging in unconstitutional actions. DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin is a defendant in the suit.
The lawsuit asks the court to order DHS and ICE officials to stop its speech-chilling coercion and retaliation against Streever for his protected speech.
“I think that everyone agrees that if law enforcement came to David’s home and arrested him for this email—everyone would look at that and say that’s a violation of the First Amendment,” Adam Steinbaugh, senior attorney at FIRE and lead counsel on the case, told Military.com. “You can’t arrest people for their free speech.
“Here, you have federal agents coming to someone’s home and handing their wife a notice, essentially alleging that they’re committing a crime because of their speech and telling them to knock it off. That’s still a violation of the First Amendment.”
Steinbaugh said such actions are intended to chill speech, which constitutes a First Amendment violation since it would coerce an average citizen into silence.
“[Vice President] JD Vance, among others, has rightly criticized other countries for sending similar notices to people alleging that their speech might be a criminal act,” he added. “We don’t want that happening here.”
ICE, DHS Defend Agents and Tactics
Military.com asked ICE and DHS about the agencies’ purported free speech efforts and the allegations of chilling such speech on grounds of the First Amendment.
A DHS spokesperson said that ICE “investigates all credible threats” towards officers, employees and the director, adding that any allegation of DHS and its components attempting to quash free speech is “categorically false.”
“Our law enforcement officers are on the frontlines arresting terrorists, gang members, murderers, child sex abusers and rapists,” the DHS spokesperson told Military.com. “They are experiencing coordinated campaigns of violence against them and facing a 1,300% increase in assaults against them, a 3,300% increase in vehicular attacks, and an 8,000% increase in death threats.
“Anyone who assaults or threatens our law enforcement officers will face the consequences.”
What the Lawsuit Claims
The lawsuit dates back to January, at the same time that local events in Minnesota led to national attention and protests following the shooting deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti.
It led to Streever writing a three-paragraph email to then-acting ICE Director Todd Lyons, entitled “What’s next,” and calling him a “monstrous human being” who will “go down in history as America’s Reinhard Heydrich, the butcher,” a reference to the Nazi official.
Nothing resulted from the letter, at least at first. But about five months later and after purportedly learning that Streever and his 7-year-old daughter were in Finland, ICE Special Agents David Brodie and Abbi Henry visited Streever’s house in Rochester.
They told Streever’s wife that he “may or may not have sent an email threatening” the ICE director and left her with an ominous “WARNING NOTICE” for Streever, declaring “YOU MAY BE IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW” because of “an email sent to Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons.” The notice insisted that Streever “discontinue” his “behavior,” and called for Streever to sign it and return it to ICE.
According to the complaint, once Streever and his daughter returned to the states, a third DHS agent allegedly tracked them to a New York City hotel where a clerk “roused” Streever from his sleep to tell him a federal agent was looking for him. The agent gave the clerk his business card to give to Streever, who soon discovered voicemails from two “Homeland Security Investigations” callers who did not provide their names.
“We are aware of someone else who received a similar notice on the same day for their online speech, and this is part of a broader campaign to suppress speech,” Steinbaugh said. “DHS has issued administrative subpoenas, meaning there’s no or little judicial oversight over their issuance, targeting people for protected online speech. So, you know, this is, I think, just a new iteration of the same speech killing strategy.
Streever is not the only person to have recently received such a notice, according to the lawsuit. Special Agents Brodie and Henry also allegedly confronted a Syracuse resident on June 23—the same date the agents attempted to confront Streever at his home in Rochester—by visiting her while she was volunteering at a polling place during New York’s primary elections to deliver a similar “WARNING NOTICE.”
Squashing Free Speech ‘Freezes Everyone’
The lawsuit states that Streever’s email to ICE is “core political speech…that sits at the highest rung of the First Amendment.”
It does not align with “a true threat” that any “reasonable” person would see in that manner, the suit adds.
“Beyond that, we think that getting precedent here will help not only David but other people who face similar threats to their speech, whether or not they are criticizing ICE under a Republican president or criticizing some other policy under a Democrat president in the future,” Steinbaugh said.
Steinbaugh said the goal of the lawsuit revolving around Streever, a father of two married to an Episcopal priest with no major criminal charges, is a request of the court to issue an injunction preventing the government from continuing its campaign directed at Streever and “leave him alone.”
“What is most important is that we recognize that this power has been, can be, and will be used by officials across the political spectrum,” he said. “Whether or not it is the left hand or the right hand of the federal agent holding the baton, they’re still swinging that baton.
“So, it is important to defend freedom of expression, no matter which side of the aisle it might be coming from because if we let the chilling effect grow, it’s going to freeze out everyone.”
Read the full article here