The FBI spied on a Signal group chat of immigration activists, records reveal | FBI

The FBI spied on a private chat of the Signal group of immigrant rights activists who were organizing “court surveillance” efforts in New York this spring, law enforcement records shared with the Guardian show.

The FBI, according to the documents, gained access to the conversations of a Signal “court monitoring” group that helps coordinate volunteer activists who monitor public proceedings in three federal immigration courts in New York. The U.S. government has been repeatedly accused of violating immigrants’ rights to due process in these courts.

A “joint situational information report” from the FBI and the New York Police Department (NYPD), dated August 28, 2025, cited a conversation on Signal, the encrypted messaging app, and also referred to court observers as “anarchist violent extremist actors.” The two-page report was distributed to other law enforcement agencies in the United States.

The documents were obtained by Property of the People, a government transparency nonprofit, through public records requests.

Activist groups have stepped up efforts to observe and document courthouse activities in recent months as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests more and more immigrants who appear in court for routine hearings. An ICE directive issued the day after Donald Trump took office in January established that agents could arrest immigrants in court; this practice had been restricted under the Biden administration over concerns that judicial arrests would interfere with the “fair administration of justice.”

In immigration courts across the country this year, the U.S. government has repeatedly rejected immigrants’ cases at hearings, allowing federal agents to then arrest immigrants in courthouse hallways, the Guardian previously reported. A recent Associated Press investigation suggests that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been setting up “deportation traps” in court. A federal officer was filmed pushing a woman to the ground in a New York courthouse in September, prompting a rare reprimand from DHS.

The FBI’s August report, prepared by its New York division, did not specify how the bureau accessed the Signal group. The Signal platform, widely used by activists, is known for its end-to-end encryption; Typically, the only way law enforcement can access messages is to include them directly in the chat, receive copies from a participant, or gain access to a member’s unlocked phone.

The FBI said the information came from a “sensitive source with excellent access” and presented the report as a warning against “extremist actors targeting law enforcement and federal facilities.”

In late May, an individual “participated in a debriefing session held via a Signal call within the Signal ‘courtwatch’ chat group,” the FBI wrote, without identifying the individual or the specific group or organizations involved. This person “discussed how to improve future operations near federal facilities in New York City, including 26 Federal Plaza, 201 Varick Street, and 290 Broadway,” the report continued, listing the addresses of three immigration courts in Manhattan.

“The collection of media information about the activities was ‘critical information’; the media included photos and videos of law enforcement officers, including their badges, faces, names, license plates, law enforcement vehicles, and interiors of federal facilities,” the FBI wrote, summarizing the conversations.

Discussions during the chat included “instructions on where to go and what to say to gain access to federal courtrooms,” with the FBI noting that group members were told which floors to visit and to tell officials they were there to observe, with statements such as: “I have to be heard at 9:30 a.m. »

The FBI added: “’Courtwatch’ is a private/invitation-only group chat, encrypted with the Signal app, created by the identified individual. [individual]. In encrypted private online chats, identified individuals [individual] is known for asking protest participants to use violence against [law enforcement].”

The FBI declined to comment in response to a detailed list of questions. DHS also declined to comment, referring questions to the FBI. An NYPD spokesperson said the report was “not an NYPD document.” ICE did not respond to requests for comment.

The memo provided no additional details about the individual or their alleged past calls for violence and offered no details or evidence as to why the FBI labeled them “anarchist violent extremists.” The court’s monitoring efforts have been nonviolent, and the FBI did not respond to an inquiry seeking specific instances of violence and did not respond to questions about whether law enforcement had continued access to the private group.

Immigration court hearings, run by the Department of Justice (DoJ), are open to the public and observers do not have to notify the courts in advance of their presence.

It’s not clear whether specific groups were targeted by Signal surveillance. Volunteers from various immigrant rights organizations and grassroots groups have helped monitor New York’s immigration court, which has become a common practice in cities across the country as DHS arrests have increased.

New York City Comptroller Brad Lander was arrested by ICE in June at an immigration courthouse while accompanying a New York immigrant. The former mayoral candidate, who regularly participated in court-watching, condemned the FBI report in a statement, saying “the FBI’s surveillance tactics are straight out of J Edgar Hoover’s playbook,” referring to the former longtime FBI director known for his espionage and attacks on activists.

“Observing immigration court hearings is a legal, non-violent act, unlike the ICE kidnappings we have regularly witnessed for months outside of courtrooms,” Lander said. “Courtwatch’s mission is to provide transparency and ensure people don’t disappear without due process – surveillance and intimidation from Trump’s corrupt Justice Department will not stop us from coming forward to protect our neighbors and the rule of law.”

“Basic civic participation does not constitute a terrorist threat,” added Dr. Ryan Shapiro, executive director of Property of the People, in a statement. “The FBI’s treatment of him as such is yet another example of the Trump regime’s profound contempt for even the most rudimentary democratic freedoms.”

Natalie Baldassarre, a Justice Department spokeswoman, did not respond to questions about FBI surveillance, but said in a statement: “After four years of the Biden administration forcing immigration courts to implement a de facto amnesty for hundreds of thousands of aliens, this Justice Department is restoring the integrity of our courts and will continue to enforce federal immigration law to protect national security and public safety.”

Spencer Reynolds, a civil liberties advocate and former senior intelligence adviser to DHS, said the FBI report was part of a trend by the U.S. government to criminalize free speech activities. He pointed out that White House border official Tom Homan said earlier this year that “know your rights” training could be seen as an obstacle to law enforcement; DHS Arrests People Filming Immigration Agents; and Trump signing an executive order designating “antifa,” the decentralized anti-fascist movement, a “domestic terrorist organization,” raising fears of a broad crackdown on left-wing activism.

“The U.S. government is turning these powerful national security agencies toward critics and people who advocate for immigrants’ rights, and while it’s so shocking to see something like this, it’s not surprising,” said Reynolds, who reviewed the FBI document for the Guardian. “These activities, as well as public access to our courts, are legal and protected by our rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, but we regularly see federal officials portray efforts to obtain basic accountability as threats. »

FBI surveillance of this nature is not subject to meaningful oversight and there are few safeguards to prevent violations of people’s rights, Reynolds added.

Reynolds compared FBI surveillance to the bureau’s past efforts to infiltrate and disrupt the civil rights movement in the 1960s and spy on Muslim communities after 9/11.

Undercover operations, he stressed, can lead to conflict between activists and growing distrust: “There is a significant risk of paralyzing and undermining these types of private discussion environments. »