SYRACUSE, NY — Representative John W. Mannion (NY-22) sent a follow-up letter to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin seeking answers about why federal agents are tracking down and questioning American citizens who express legitimate concerns online about Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activities.
Representative Mannion previously sent a letter on June 26, 2026, after out of state ICE agents delivered an unsigned warning letter to a Syracuse poll worker over her personal social media activity.
The full text is below and can be found here:
The Honorable Markwayne Mullin
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
2707 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20528
Dear Secretary Mullin,
Recently, the Wall Street Journal published “How ICE Is Weaponizing Social Media Against Its Critics,” a report on a government sponsored, taxpayer funded surveillance scheme that has resulted in federal agents tracking, confronting, and intimidating American citizens over their personal social media use. I again urge your Department to put an end to activities targeting protected speech under the First Amendment.
On June 26, 2026, I wrote regarding a June 23 incident in Syracuse, New York, in which two U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents delivered a warning notice concerning personal social media use to a constituent while performing her duties as a poll worker during New York’s primary elections. My letter asked about who authorized the action and the policies governing such notices.
Your July 13 response letter answered none of those questions. Instead, ICE offered general assurances about the professionalism of its workforce and stated that it “cannot comment on the specifics of an ongoing investigation.” When my staff followed up to request a meeting with appropriate officials to discuss the matter further, our request went unanswered. Your Department’s response is inadequate.
While ICE has a responsibility to investigate and take action to prevent true threats to federal agents, it is clear from the activities that took place in June in Syracuse, and from the concerning reporting by the Wall Street Journal that your Department has expanded the scope of its surveillance methods to target individuals for expressing opinions in their online speech. Our ability to criticize governmental actions is not a threat to America, rather, our nation’s fierce protection of our First Amendment rights is one of the fundamental freedoms that the government must respect.
An open investigation into a single incident should not prevent the Department from communicating its standing policies and is not a substitute for congressional oversight. For that reason, I am requesting written answers to the following questions:
-
Your letter declined to comment on “operational planning, decision-making, and personnel involvement,” which seems to confirm that what happened in Syracuse is part of a broader planned operation. Does ICE have a written policy or administrative directive governing the delivery of warning notices to private citizens regarding their social media activity? If so, who authorized such a policy?
-
Has ICE initiated a review into whether agents’ use of unsigned notices and their conduct in delivering such notices to polling sites during an ongoing election are consistent with Department policy?
-
What legal authority does ICE rely on when directing a person to remove or modify social media content that may be protected speech?
-
Your letter states that ICE’s Office of Public Responsibility (OPR) “investigates allegations of misconduct appropriately.” OPR’s mandate, by ICE’s own description, covers employee misconduct and not the speech of private citizens. What role does OPR have in monitoring or reviewing the social media activity of private citizens who are not ICE employees or contractors?
-
Identify the specific appropriation account and program, or activity within that account used to fund OPR’s role in monitoring and reviewing the social media activity of private individuals.
-
In the past three fiscal years, how much has ICE obligated or spent to monitor, investigate, or contact private individuals based on their social media activity, including expenditures for contracts, software, data services, and other technology?
-
In the past three fiscal years, how many ICE investigations involving alleged threatening comments made through social media resulted in a criminal referral, indictment or criminal charge, or conviction or guilty plea? Please identify how many individuals were contacted or presented with warning notices but were never charged with an offense.
Americans should not be surveilled, tracked down, or questioned by federal agents simply for expressing their legitimate concerns over ICE’s activities online. The Department must immediately act to clarify its policies, the investigations process that has resulted in federal agents tracking down and confronting civilians at home, at their place of work, or even on their vacation with family for activity protected by the First Amendment, and take corrective action to ensure that protocol designed to protect federal agents and investigate credible threats does just that, rather than serving as a pretext to harass your critics.
Please provide a complete response by September 4, 2026.
Sincerely,
John Mannion
Member of Congress
