The video below details some of the racist attempts to purge black people from positions of authority and to erase the racist history of attacks on black people over time. The video also explains how tRump ordered the agencies of his government to remove black hoildays from the list of free entry days at national parks and instead replaced them with his birthday. This is simply the whitewashing of history, the removing of evidence of the massive racism / damage done to black people in the past, and the purification of the US as a white ethnostate. Just look how tRump refers to black journolists. Hugs
As republicans lose control due to the public being upset with what they are doing they don’t change their views / actions, but instead they try harder to restrict voters rights to vote. They don’t believe in democracy or being public servants; they believe in a one party rule where they are the party in control. Why? Because it gives them all they want, power, fame, fortune, and the ability to control how other people live. The goals of these people who are not interested in others living as who they are and having happy quailty lives but in having total control over how others live to force them to live according to the church doctrines of their version of the religion. But the thing about this SAVE act is it would keep married women from voting if they have not updated all of their identification and other requirements. I experienced this when Ron and I got married. I took his last name. I think everyone who reads the blog understands why. I had to change everything and then take all that documentation to the election supervisor’s office: my marriage certificate, my socialsecurity name change, and so much more. How many people fail to do that and then go to vote and can’t? Hugs
House Republicans are proposing sweeping changes to the nation’s voting laws, a long-shot priority for President Donald Trump that would impose stricter requirements, including some before Americans vote in the midterm elections in the fall.
The package released Thursday reflects a number of the party’s most sought-after election changes, including requirements for photo IDs before people can vote and proof of citizenship, both to be put in place in 2027. Others, including prohibitions on universal vote-by-mail and ranked choice voting — two voting methods that have proved popular in some states — would happen immediately. The Republican president continues to insist that the 2020 election he lost to Democrat Joe Biden was rigged.
“Americans should be confident their elections are being run with integrity — including commonsense voter ID requirements, clean voter rolls, and citizenship verification,” said Rep. Bryan Steil, chairman of the House Administration Committee, in a statement.
“These reforms will improve voter confidence, bolster election integrity, and make it easy to vote, but hard to cheat,” said Steil, R-Wis.
The legislation faces a long road in the narrowly-split Congress, where Democrats have rejected similar ideas as disenfranchising Americans’ ability to vote with onerous registration and ID requirements. The effort comes as the Trump administration is turning its attention toward election issues before the November election, when control of Congress will be at stake.
The administration sent FBI agents Wednesday to raid the election headquarters of Fulton County, Georgia, which includes most of Atlanta, seeking ballots from the 2020 election. That follows Trump’s comments earlier this month when he suggested that charges related to that election were imminent.
The top Democrat on the House Administration Committee, Rep. Joe Morelle of New York, said Trump and the Republican Party are trying to “rig” the system.
“This is their latest attempt to block millions of Americans from exercising their right to vote,” Morelle said in a statement. He said he would “fight the bill at every turn.”
Republicans are calling their new legislation the “Make Elections Great Again Act” and say their proposal should provide the minimum standard for elections for federal offices.
The 120-plus-page bill includes requirements that people present a photo ID before they vote and that states verify the citizenship of individuals when they register to vote, starting next year.
More immediately, this fall it would require states to use “auditable” paper ballots in elections, which most already do; prohibit states from mailing ballots to all voters through universal vote-by-mail systems; and ban ranked choice voting, which is used in Maine and Alaska.
States risk losing federal election funds at various junctures for noncompliance. For example, states would be required to have agreements with the attorney general’s office to share information about potential voter fraud or risk losing federal election funds in 2026.
And starting this year, it would require states to more frequently update their voting rolls, every 30 days.
Stephen Richer, a Republican who clashed with Trump over the president’s false election conspiracy theories while he served as the recorder in Maricopa County, Arizona, posted on the social media site X that the bill is reminiscent of a Democratic effort to reshape national elections in the opposite direction that floundered during Biden’s term.
He wrote that the legislation “flattens federalism, and takes away many rights from the states.”
Similar Republican proposals have drawn alarm from voting rights group, which say such changes could lead to widespread problems for voters.
For example, prior Republican efforts to require proof of citizenship to vote have been criticized by Democrats as disenfranchising married women whose last names do not match birth certificates or other government documents.
The Brennan Center for Justice and other groups estimated in a 2023 report that 9% of U.S. citizens of voting age, or 21.3 million people, do not have proof of their citizenship readily available. Almost half of Americans do not have a U.S. passport.
Trump has long signaled a desire to change how elections are run in the United States. Last year he issued an executive order that included a citizenship requirement, among other election-related changes.
At the time, House Republicans approved legislation, the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act,” that would cement Trump’s order into law. That bill has stalled in the Senate, though lawmakers have recently revived efforts to bring it forward for consideration.
….
Associated Press writer Nicholas Riccardi in Denver contributed to this report.
I often say that a lot of anti-trans anti-gay anti-LGBTQ+ people have their feelings because they don’t feel different from the cis straight majority so can’t understand or accept that such things because they simply don’t feel that way. If they don’t feel it it can’t be real which is the same with how many white people feel about racism. Remember the old question of how do you know you’re gay or trans or lesbian or nonbinary or what ever simply because the people who grew up straight and cis felt normal in society? But if you ask them when they knew or how they knew they were straight and / or cis they are confused. If a boy at 10 comes out as gay the parents freak out, but if that same kid starts showing interest in girls the parents are ecstatic about their boy growing up. Why the difference? Because one fulfills their expectations and the other … well it just is not like them. It simply comes down to tradition and what feels normal for them. Every person who asked me if I tried to change my sexual orientation and there have been so many, to them I ask have you? They act offended. Why would I do that and I reply, then why should I. Then if they persist for some reason that I should do conversion therapy I ask could they convert from their straight / cis desires to being LGBTQ+? Again they are stunned why they would do that and instantly claim not I couldn’t do that. Then again why ask me to do it? Hugs
Providing objective, nonpartisan, rigorous, original journalism that investigates America’s anti-LGBTQ landscape and elevates everyday American heroes. Expect two rigorously reported stories every weekend.
On Oct. 7, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Chiles v. Salazar, a case that challenges Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy.
Shortly after, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) sent an email to their supporters quoting Paul in Ephesians 6:12: “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”
The email goes on to say, “You might think that a law like this might be just a ‘Colorado problem.’ Sadly, laws like this exist in 22 other states,” referencing other parts of the U.S. that have instituted conversion therapy bans.
This sort of language about conversion therapy is nothing new for the Christian legal group representing Kaley Chiles. Unlike most legal organizations, ADF is sharply anti-LGBTQ. Since their inception over 30 years ago, the group has fought to maintain anti-sodomy laws, uphold the right to discriminate against gay couples and overturn Roe v. Wade.
In recent years, a major element of their fight has been to legalize the discredited practice of conversion therapy.
The Supreme Court appears poised to rule in favor of ADF, which could effectively invalidate conversion therapy bans for minors by licensed professionals across the U.S. This victory would add to the organization’s already-high win streak, which they say is around 80%.
“I don’t think anyone is undermining LGBTQ rights as relentlessly as ADF,” Peter Montgomery, research director at the advocacy group People for the American Way, told Uncloseted Media and GAY TIMES. “They’re shaping the culture for generations to come.”
Although nearly every major medical association has denounced conversion therapy, ADF is arguing that disallowing the practice is a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.
“This case is part of its crusade to turn religious freedom into a license to harm others,” says Amy Tai, the co-author of an amicus brief in Chiles v. Salazar that is urging the Supreme Court to uphold the Colorado law. “It is part of a larger effort and movement to harm LGBTQ people and strip them of their constitutional rights.”
ADF, originally the Alliance Defense Fund, was founded by evangelical anti-gay activists in 1994. Alan Sears, their former CEO and president, co-authored “The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today.” The book calls homosexuality a “disordered sexual behavior” and equates it with pedophilia and states that gay people on college campuses are involved in “the promotion of sexual relations between adults and children.”
D. James Kennedy, another founder, has preached about “reparative” therapy for gay folks. In a 1993 fundraising letter for his Christian media organization Coral Ridge Ministries, he asked “Would you want your son, daughter, or grandchild sharing a shower, foxhole, or blood with a homosexual?”
A third founder was the late James Dobson, who advised several presidents and argued that conversion therapy could “cure” people.
Since ADF launched, many powerful political figures with anti-LGBTQ beliefs have worked for them. While working as an ADF spokesperson between 2002 and 2010, House Speaker Mike Johnson described gay folks as “destructive” and argued that support for homosexuality could lead to support for pedophilia.
Kristen Waggoner speaking at a press conference in 2018 (Groversawit)
And their current president, Kristen Waggoner, has delegitimized the harm conversion therapy causes by defining the practice as merely having conversations.
Today, their influence in the U.S. government is stronger than ever, with ties to all three branches. In addition to Speaker Johnson, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett has been a paid speaker for ADF at least five times since 2011. And in May, President Donald Trump appointed Waggoner to the newly-formed Religious Liberty Commission.
All of these resources and connections are employed to advance an anti-LGBTQ agenda. “They want to see what they see as the God-defined order for gender and marriage be imposed into law,” Montgomery says. “They are trying to create a legal regime in which people can claim religious beliefs to opt out of laws that apply to everyone else.”
History of Fighting to Criminalize Homosexuality and Legalize Conversion Therapy
Over time, ADF has incorporated these viewpoints into their litigation to try and dismantle legal protections for LGBTQ people.
“Just 20 years ago, they were still arguing in court that states should be able to criminalize gay people,” says Montgomery.
In 2000, for example, ADF funded amicus briefs in Dale v. Boy Scouts of America, a case where an assistant scoutmaster sued the Boy Scouts after the organization revoked his membership for being gay. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of ADF.
In 2003, when support for gay marriage was still low in the U.S., they filed an amicus brief to uphold the criminalization of gay sex in Lawrence v. Texas, arguing that the state has a right to regulate “public health and morality.” The group lost the case and sodomy laws were banned nationwide.
As public opinion changed and gay marriage became legal across America in 2015, ADF shifted to more nuanced arguments. “Now, because they know that most Americans favor LGBTQ equality, they’ve really reframed their arguments [around] religious liberty and free speech,” says Montgomery.
The organization has since set its sights on overturning state bans on conversion therapy. In 2018, ADF Senior Counsel Matt Sharp argued against a California bill that classified conversion therapy as fraud. And in 2019, the group sued New York City for a similar law, which led the city to reverse the ban out of fear the case would reach the Supreme Court.
A few years later, in 2021, ADF fought to overturn a statewide conversion therapy ban in Washington, where they represented Christian therapist Brian Tingley. In this instance, they argued that Washington’s law censored Tingley from speaking about gender dysphoria.
A federal appeals court unanimously upheld Washington’s law, with Circuit Judge Ronald Gould shutting down ADF’s argument, writing that: “Washington, like other states, has concluded that health care providers should not be able to treat a child by such means as telling him that he is ‘the abomination we had heard about in Sunday school.’”
Learning from their mistakes, ADF tried again with Chiles v. Salazar, claiming the Colorado law discriminates against Chiles’ viewpoint. Chiles is an evangelical therapist who received her counseling training and education from a seminary.
In their arguments to the Supreme Court, ADF says the conversion therapy ban encourages therapists to help minors explore LGBTQ identities and condemns assisting patients to align with their assigned gender.
Though intended to ban conversion therapy for all LGBTQ people, ADF’s case focuses on gender identity, capitalizing on souring U.S. public opinion on trans rights.
“Chiles believes that people flourish when they live consistently with God’s design, including their biological sex,” ADF wrote in a petition to the Supreme Court.
“ADF has tried to draw a connection between laws prohibiting conversion therapy and states attempting to force mental health professionals or doctors to treat transgender youth,” Christopher Stoll, senior staff attorney at the National Center for LGBTQ Rights, told Uncloseted Media and GAY TIMES. But if the law passes, conversion therapy would become legal to practice on all LGBTQ people.
Another part of ADF’s success stems from manufacturing legal battles to advance cases that match their goals.
Chiles, for example, had not incurred any legal penalty from the Colorado district attorney. Instead, ADF filed a pre-enforcement lawsuit, claiming that she had censored herself and stopped accepting patients for conversion therapy following the law’s passage.
“All of these cases are, in a sense, made up cases. … They’re brought on behalf of therapists who have not actually been subject to any kind of investigation or penalty by either state or local governments,” says Stoll, who is representing Kansas City, Mo. as ADF and Missouri’s Attorney General challenge the city’s ban on conversion therapy.
This strategy is what makes ADF stand out. Montgomery says that unlike many other legal organizations, ADF also helps file lawsuits and writes the bills that directly challenge precedents and legislation they hope to change.
This was in part how they were effective in overturning Roe v. Wade. ADF drafted the Gestational Age Act, which banned abortion in Mississippi after 15 weeks of pregnancy. That law then became the central point of the Dobbs case, which overturned abortion rights nationwide.
“They’re just engineered to test these legal arguments, when really no dispute has arisen,” says Stoll.
When asked for comment, an Alliance Defending Freedom Media Relations Specialist redirected Uncloseted Media to a website criticizing the Southern Poverty Law Center, saying the group mischaracterizes ADF as a hate group.
How ADF Operates Globally
ADF’s efforts to dismantle conversion therapy and LGBTQ rights span far beyond the U.S. Alliance Defending Freedom International (ADFI) boasts about efforts in 70 countries, where they push anti-LGBTQ legislation as far as possible in each country.
In 2012, ADF’s then-legal counsel Piero Tozzi spoke at a conference in Jamaica, advocating for the prohibition of gay sex, stating that the “retention of the legislation prohibiting sodomy is a bulwark against this agenda.” And in 2013, members of ADF defended a statute in Belize that characterized LGBTQ sex as “carnal intercourse against the order of nature.”
“They’re one of the most powerful and influential Christian right religious extremist groups that we have operating in Europe,” Neil Datta, executive director of the European Parliamentary Forum on Sexual and Reproductive Rights, told Uncloseted Media and GAY TIMES.
Datta says with offices in six cities with international human rights centers, ADFI contacts political allies throughout the continent, feeding them legal briefs and direct arguments. Then, those partners take that information and rejig it to align with their country’s political discourse.
“They’re hiring Europeans, training them in the American model of social issues litigation from an anti-rights perspective, and then hoping that [they] will be running with this in European courts,” Datta says. “They bring know-how and capacity to the continent.”
Datta says the U.S. is where the organization conducts its litmus tests for anti-LGBTQ laws and legal arguments: “In the U.S., you have 50 little courts that you can try things out in,” he says. “[ADF] has their own range of different areas that they would like to be active in, and they hunt for opportunities where they can make some progress.”
That includes the defense of Finnish politician Päivi Räsänen, who in 2021 was tried for hate speech for condemning a Lutheran church for supporting a Pride event. With ADFI’s assistance, Räsänen was acquitted in 2023.
Making Headway to Ban Conversion Therapy Abroad
While ADFI has yet to succeed in overturning conversion therapy bans in Europe, Datta says some politicians with links to the group have promoted reintegrative therapy, another form of therapy that attempts to help folks suppress same-sex attraction. While the term attempts to distance itself from conversion therapy, it uses similar procedures to the condemned practice.
However, Datta says ADFI is taking steps to shift the discourse by lobbying against the Digital Services Act, a European Union regulation for online hate speech.
In October, ADFI penned a letter to the European Commission asking the organization to review the law. ADF has also posted various blogs on the legislation, one posing a hypothetical about gender identity, stating, “Let’s say you went on Facebook … to post something as common sense as believing that there are only two genders. … If someone were to report that as hate speech, the E.U. could pressure Meta … to remove the post lest it face those stiff financial penalties.”
ADFI has also expanded its horizons to Africa. In May, Bettina Roska, an ADFI legal officer based in Geneva, joined a consortium of anti-LGBTQ advocates in a Pan-African conference on “family values” in Nairobi, Kenya.
“They are trying to do the same thing in Africa, around the African Union, and the African human rights system,” Jamie Vernaelde, senior researcher at Ipas, a non-governmental organization that focuses on reducing the harm of U.S. foreign policy, told Uncloseted Media and GAY TIMES.
Back in the U.S., the Supreme Court will rule on Chiles v. Salazar before the end of its current term next year. Their decision will potentially clear the way for conversion therapy to be practiced nationwide and abroad.
Vernaelde says that if Chiles v. Salazar is successful, ADF is hoping to bring their fight against conversion therapy worldwide in the same way they are expanding their anti-abortion lawsuits. Today, the group is attempting to undo abortion protections in the U.K. with the help of allies in the country’s right-wing Reform party.
“This is a template that they can use in other places that they can spread as widely as they want through their networks,” says Vernaelde.
If objective, nonpartisan, rigorous, LGBTQ-focused journalism is important to you, please consider making a tax-deductible donation through our fiscal sponsor, Resource Impact, by clicking this button:
With federal agents storming the streets of American communities, there’s no single right way to approach this dangerous moment. But there are steps you can take to stay safe—and have an impact.
Photographer: Victor J. Blue/Getty Images
If federal immigration agents are coming to your area—or have already arrived—you may be frantically making plans to lay low at home, or perhaps grabbing your whistle and lacing up your sneakers to join a neighborhood watch. It’s a terrifying situation for undocumented residents and all American immigrants, and the climate has even become fraught for US citizens too. There are no simple answers for how to protect yourself and others in every scenario, but there are frameworks you can use for weighing your options.
The presence of immigration agents in cities and towns around the country has starkly increased in recent months, and tensions have escalated in step. On Wednesday, a federal agent shot and killed 37-year-old Minneapolis resident and US citizen Renee Nicole Good in her car during an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operation. Having already deployed 2,000 agents to Minnesota, DHS reportedly planned this week to send 1,000 more. “There are now more ICE agents in Minnesota than there are combined in Minneapolis police force and St. Paul police force,” Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar said on Friday. “So they are outnumbering our own local police officers out on the streets.” (Minnesota and Illinois have since filed lawsuits in federal court to end the ICE “invasion” in those states.)
Elsewhere, Customs and Border Protection agents shot two people in a car in Portland, Oregon, on Thursday, hospitalizing both. These tragedies are just the latest in a series of violent incidents involving immigration agents that have escalated since US president Donald Trump took office a year ago with a sweeping anti-immigration agenda. In addition to intense activity in Minneapolis and Portland, ICE and CBP have carried out deportation operations across the US.
“The number of ICE agents has dramatically increased, the sheer presence in people’s communities is larger,” says Jennifer Whitlock, senior policy counsel at the National Immigration Law Center. “And this means that the risk of encountering an ICE officer has really increased for people, even if you’re not in any way attached to immigration.”
Pause
Problems have persisted for years with ICE and CBP actions—including arrests and detentions—that accidentally ensnare US citizens and other documented residents. Additionally, the agencies’ operations have a history of aggression and mistreatment in dealing with suspects. Immigration infractions are typically civil, not criminal offenses. Over the last year, though, the Department of Homeland Security’s budget for immigration enforcement has expanded substantially at the same time that public unrest about the activity has grown. The result is a charged climate in which standard interactions can quickly, and dangerously, escalate.
“We’re surging operations because of the dangerous situation we see in this country,” homeland security secretary Kristi Noem said in a press conference on Wednesday. “We should all work together to protect our citizens.”
Many see immigration enforcement’s track record and current activity very differently, though.
“For its entire existence, ICE has been a very violent agency and a very unaccountable agency without a lot of oversight or transparency,” says Nithya Nathan-Pineau, policy attorney and strategist at the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.
She notes that as immigration officers have been involved in more and more violent incidents in recent months, it has become harder than ever to offer simple, definitive advice to people about assessing risk in interactions with federal agents.
Numerous sources told WIRED that their trainings and materials about interacting with federal immigration agents are actively evolving to reflect the current moment. For example, one core point has long been to explain the difference between a judicial warrant signed by a judge that gives law enforcement the right to, say, enter a person’s home versus the administrative warrants that ICE agents often carry that do not give them that right. “Don’t open the door for ICE” is a common refrain. But this type of information, while still accurate, does not fully account for the chaotic intensity of current US immigration enforcement.
“In the past, we would encourage people to exercise your right to protest or record video to document,” the National Immigration Law Center’s Whitlock says. “We always talked about risk assessment and how some people are more vulnerable than others, but now it’s not just risk of arrest at a protest, it’s risk of physical harm. I don’t think we fully anticipated how ICE and CBP would ignore and violate people’s constitutional rights.”
In short, there is some risk inherent in any interaction with federal immigration officials, whether you’re a US citizen or not. Even if you aren’t willing to expose yourself in that way, though, you can still take action to meaningfully and concretely help people in your community affected by the Trump administration’s policies.
Plan Ahead
Depending on your situation, you should make a plan in case you end up interacting with immigration enforcement while out and about.
In its online guidance, the nonprofit National Immigrant Justice Center says individuals and communities can create a “safety plan” to help be best prepared in case ICE operatives arrive in the area. Such a plan could involve identifying trusted family members, friends, or colleagues who can act as emergency contacts for people who could be the target of federal immigration actions, or anyone who could come into contact with agents. Memorize their phone numbers and also make sure that your child’s school or daycare has emergency contacts on file. If you know you are at specific risk of deportation, you may consider additional steps, too, related to establishing an emergency guardian for children and a power of attorney for yourself.
Given that US citizens are not safe from violence or arrest at the hands of federal immigration agents, immigrants with an established status, visa, or permanent residency are potentially at even higher risk if they participate in community safety efforts or other activities that put them near immigration agents.
In December, DHS vehemently denied to WIRED that its agents engage in racial profiling as part of immigration operations. Multiple sources emphasized to WIRED, though, that nonwhite Americans should consider being extra cautious about proximity to immigration agents. This is particularly true in light of a September 2025 US Supreme Court decision in which Justice Brett Kavanaugh concluded that someone’s apparent ethnicity may be a “relevant factor” that could justify detaining someone during an immigration enforcement action—something now derisively known as a “Kavanaugh stop.”
You should consider taking precautions to protect yourself against potential digital surveillance if you know you are going to be proximal to immigration authorities. CBP and ICE both have digital surveillance capabilities that are increasing all the time. You can’t always anticipate when you might encounter federal agents, of course, but people who could specifically be the target of an immigration enforcement action should consider taking extra digital precautions if they can.
Looking broadly, sources told WIRED that political polarization and rising tensions across the US are key contexts in assessing potential risks.
“It’s no longer Officer Friendly out there,” Whitlock says. “This is not to give any excuse, but I can imagine there is a mindset within the field ICE agents and CBP where they really do think they’re under attack and being threatened. And no one is above the law, but I think it’s important for people to understand that there are going to be limited forms of trying to hold these officers accountable in practice.”
On the Scene
If you find yourself witnessing an immigration enforcement action, there are some things to keep in mind if you want to stick around.
“The goal is to be an observer and to document what is happening,” says Nathan-Pineau of the Immigrant Legal Resource Center. “The goal is not to go and try to intervene in the law enforcement action.”
Training materials from Siembra NC, a North Carolina–based grassroots organization working to defend its local communities from exploitation, say that the priority when ICE is present is letting agents know they are being observed and reminding people of their right to remain silent, while deescalating whenever possible and promoting safety. The group advises that if ICE operatives are conducting an arrest or traffic stop, responders should try to approach within their line of sight and identify themselves in the process.
You can also report immigration enforcements sightings in many areas without getting involved by calling a local ICE watch tip line. Many immigration advocacy and human rights groups suggest using the “SALUTE” acronym to guide the information you give in these reports. Size: How many agents or officers you see. Activity: What are they doing? Has anyone been detained? Location: Where exactly did you see them and what direction are they heading in? Units: What types of officers are they or what words and markings can you see on their uniforms? Time: What time was the sighting? Make reports as quickly as possible. Equipment: What do the agents have with them, such as types of weapons, vehicles, crowd control methods, and other details?
Filming ICE behavior can let agents know they are being watched, potentially creating some accountability for their actions, as well as a digital evidence trail for any legal cases or proceedings that may occur at a later date. When interacting with federal agents as part of a group effort responding to ICE, Siembra NC recommends identifying yourself as a volunteer, and asking agents who they are, what they are doing, and what agency they work for. Then you can state that you will remain present to observe, while also recording any models of vehicles, license plates, and operatives at the scene.
“We always advise people that if the law enforcement officer that you are filming tells you to step back, you should step back and you should say it out loud—‘I’m stepping back, I’m stepping back.’ That way you’re recording that you’re complying with their order,” Nathan-Pineau says.
Multiple sources reiterated that recording federal agents has a dual purpose, because if your own behavior and that of the people around you is appropriate to the situation, this will be captured in your documentation as well as any officer misconduct. The fact remains, though, that peacefully filming interactions can be interpreted as aggressive or escalatory precisely because it is an accountability mechanism.
Proximity is one of the most important risks to assess when on the scene, says Xavier de Janon, director of mass defense at the National Lawyers Guild. “The closer people have been to federal agents or property, the more likely they’ve been charged, tackled, or arrested,” he says.
More and more, federal prosecutors are seeking criminal charges against people for allegedly assaulting federal officers, even if the cases ultimately don’t succeed and later get dropped. The NLG recently published a guide on how protesters and observers can assess risks related to the federal assault law.
Work From Home
Even if you can’t risk hitting the streets, there are other important ways to contribute to community safety efforts.
Civil liberties groups have been campaigning nationwide to ban real-time surveillance platforms and end lucrative contracts that feed information to ICE. You can contact the offices of your local officials and tell them to cancel surveillance contracts and stop information-sharing and other law enforcement cooperation that fuels ICE operations.
“It’s good that local officials in cities targeted by ICE are speaking out and condemning their brutal tactics—but talk is cheap,” says Evan Greer, director of the digital rights activist organization Fight for the Future. “ICE violence is enabled by ICE surveillance, often with help from local police and city-run surveillance systems. If local leaders want to protect their residents from ICE’s gestapo tactics, one of the most immediate things they can do is roll back and limit surveillance by canceling contracts with surveillance vendors like Flock and banning the use of facial recognition and other forms of biometric surveillance, either through executive action or city ordinance.”
For those who are not direct targets of the federal immigration crackdown, Kathy O’Leary, a member of the Catholic peace organization New Jersey Pax Christi, recommends listening to neighbors who are directly affected and figuring out what they need. Every week, she and other volunteers go to Delaney Hall Detention Facility in New Jersey to support families who are visiting their loved ones in detention. The volunteers bring chairs and water for the visitors—who are forced to wait outside—and help visitors navigate the rules of the facility.
For example, she said, her group started bringing extra clothing because they realized that visitors were being turned away because of dress code violations. She said it started when a woman who had traveled all the way from Boston to visit her father in detention was turned away because she was wearing ripped jeans. A volunteer realized she was the same size and offered to switch pants.
“That was a serious act of resistance,” O’Leary says. “The system was creating a hurdle to see her father. The system tries to limit contact with families; it’s about stealing people’s hope and trying to break people.”
O’Leary and other volunteers also give out gift cards to grocery stores to visitors, since many families’ breadwinners are the ones in detention. O’Leary says that people who want to figure out how to get involved in their communities can see if they live near a local member of the Detention Watch Network. If there isn’t a member in their state, sometimes groups in neighboring states will know who’s active in their area.
Working with local mutual aid organizations, food pantries, and other humanitarian support groups contributes to overall community strength and safety. And simply contributing to digital ICE watch trackers as you go about your regular activities can give others valuable information.
“It’s about what lever matches your risk tolerance, matches the resources that are available to you,” says Matt Mitchell, CEO of the risk-mitigation firm Safety Sync Group. “Not everyone has the same privileges. Some people want to donate money, some people want to write letters, some people want to read up on what law enforcement and CBP and ICE can and can’t do. Some people want to put their bodies in the space and assemble because that is our right, some people want to document. There are many different levels.”
Updated 9 am ET, January 13, 2026: Added details about ICE watch tip lines.
Updated 2:45 pm ET, January 13, 2026: Corrected Xavier de Janon’s professional title.
Scottie's Playtime 
