Source: Electronic Frontier Foundation
by Mario Trujillo
“In the past year, DHS has consistently targeted people engaged in First Amendment activity. Among other things, the agency has issued subpoenas to technology companies to unmask or locate people who have documented ICE’s activities in their community, criticized the government, or attended protests. These subpoenas are unlawful, and the government knows it. When a handful of users challenged a few of them in court with the help of ACLU affiliates in Northern California and Pennsylvania, DHS withdrew them rather than waiting for a decision. But it is difficult for the average user to fight back on their own. … That is why we, joined by the ACLU of Northern California, have asked several large tech platforms to do more to protect their users …” (02/10/26)
“A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit from the Department of Justice that sought to obtain Michigan’s voter rolls, marking the latest judicial rejection in President Donald Trump’s wide-ranging attempts to gain access to voter data from states. The Justice Department has sued at least 23 states and the District of Columbia in its effort to obtain detailed voter information. In an opinion issued Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Hala Y. Jarbou, a Trump nominee, said the laws cited by the Justice Department in its complaint, including the Civil Rights Act of 1960, do not require the disclosure of the records it sought.” (02/10/26)
“Hong Kong once prided itself on a free press and an independent judiciary. Before the 1997 handover from British to Chinese rule, the city had been promised that its liberties would endure. Yet now a newspaper publisher faces the rest of his life in prison merely for doing his job.” (02/10/26)
“You don’t sell surveillance out of the gate with a system that tracks down a person in the neighborhood behind on taxes or child support. No, you sell it as a system to find that adorable lost dog (notice not even generic pets or certainly not cats because dogs are the new children for this generation). They can fight all the backlash by saying, ‘Oh come on, who can be against finding lost dogs?’ Then, months or years later, the terms and conditions have morphed and broader search capabilities are enabled without the user even knowing …. When it really gets scary, they are not even going to tell you about it. I do not believe this is just a marketing mistake — Ring appears to have adopted neighborhood surveillance as their core business model.” (02/10/26)
“A grand jury on Tuesday refused to indict a coalition of Democratic lawmakers over their participation in a controversial ‘illegal orders’ video last fall. The failed federal indictment was pursued by the office of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeanine Pirro, as first reported by The New York Times. The lawmakers urged military servicemembers and intelligence community personnel to defy illegal orders in a joint video statement released in November. The video followed the Trump administration’s decision to carry out deadly boat strikes in the Caribbean. … The Times reported that federal prosecutors were seeking to indict lawmakers for breaching a law forbidding interfering with the U.S. military’s loyalty, morale or discipline.” (02/10/26)
Source: Foundation for Individual Rights and Education
by Amanda Nordstrom
“Public universities don’t get to pick which political viewpoints are safe to express. But administrators at two major universities are trying to do just that. At the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, administrators treated the College Republicans’ pro-ICE political message like a civil rights violation. … At Penn State, an anti-ICE poster discovered outside the student center on Jan. 29 sparked heated reactions across the ideological spectrum. When some people raised the call to identify and punish whoever created the poster, Penn State responded by condemning it and announcing that University Police and Public Safety were investigating. These incidents are two sides of the same coin: administrators using official investigations to police protected political speech, in this case, on opposing sides of the immigration debate.” (02/10/26)
“Russian authorities have begun restricting access to Telegram, one of the country’s most popular social media apps, as the government continues to push everyday Russians toward its own tightly controlled alternatives to foreign tech platforms. On Tuesday, the government said it was restricting access to Telegram for the ‘protection of Russian citizens,’ accusing the app of refusing to block content authorities consider ‘criminal and terrorist.’ Russia’s telecommunications regulator Roskomnadzor said in a statement that it would continue to restrict the operation of the Telegram messenger ‘until violations of Russian law are eliminated.'” (02/10/26)
