One of the anonymous account holders, John Doe, sued to block ICE from identifying him and other critics online through summonses to Meta that he claimed infringed on core First Amendment-protected activity.
DHS initially fought Doe's motion to quash the summonses, arguing that the community watch groups endangered ICE agents by posting "pictures and videos of agents’ faces, license plates, and weapons, among other things." This was akin to "threatening ICE agents to impede the performance of their duties," DHS alleged. DHS's arguments echoed DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, who has claimed that identifying ICE agents is a crime, even though Wired noted that ICE employees often post easily discoverable LinkedIn profiles.
The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is fighting to unmask the owner of Facebook and Instagram accounts of a community watch group monitoring Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity in Pennsylvania.
Defending the right to post about ICE sightings anonymously is a Meta account holder for MontCo Community Watch, John Doe.
Doe has alleged that when the DHS sent a "summons" to Meta asking for subscriber information, it infringed on core First Amendment-protected activity, i.e., the right to publish content critical of government agencies and officials without fear of government retaliation. He also accused DHS of ignoring federal rules and seeking to vastly expand its authority to subpoena information to unmask ICE's biggest critics online.
The University of Washington campus in Seattle. (Photo by James Brooks, via Flickr, Creative Commons 2.0)
A divided three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the University of Washington violated a computer science professor’s First Amendment rights when it investigated and reprimanded him for posting a parody land acknowledgment in a syllabus.
The professor, Stuart Reges, has taught at UW’s Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science and Engineering since 2004. In January 2022, he included his own land acknowledgment in a syllabus for an introductory programming course, pushing back against the school’s recommendation that faculty include a statement recognizing Coast Salish peoples.
UW teaching professor Stuart Reges. (UW Photo)
His version invoked philosopher John Locke’s labor theory of property to argue the opposite point — that indigenous peoples could claim “almost none” of the land occupied by UW.
The statement sparked student complaints, a public apology from the Allen School, a disciplinary investigation lasting more than a year, and a separate section of the course taught by another instructor.
Reges was ultimately not formally sanctioned, but was warned that repeating the statement could lead to discipline — a threat the court said itself violated the First Amendment.
Represented by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, Reges sued the UW in 2022. A district court sided with UW, but the Ninth Circuit reversed that decision last Friday, Dec. 19.
Writing for the majority, Judge Daniel Bress said student discomfort cannot justify retaliation against a professor’s speech on matters of public concern.
Judge Sidney Thomas dissented, arguing that the disruption that Reges’ statement caused to Native students’ learning outweighed his First Amendment speech interests.
Potential next steps for the University of Washington could include asking for a rehearing from the full Ninth Circuit or an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. If the university does neither, the case returns to district court to determine remedies.
The UW said in a statement that it is weighing its options. “We maintain that we have a responsibility to protect our students and that the UW acted appropriately,” the UW statement said.
Login
