The controversy over Apple removing ICE tracking apps from its App Store isn’t over.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a digital rights group, has filed suit to compel the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security to release documentation of their communications with Apple and other tech platforms that led to the app removals.
It began in October when Apple first removed an app called ICEBlock, which allows users to report Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity in their area. Attorney General Pam Bondi took credit for the takedown, telling reporters, “We reached out to Apple today demanding they remove the ICEBlock app from their App Store—and Apple did so.” The Attorney General’s office claimed the apps presented “safety risks” for ICE agents.
In the days that followed, Apple removed several other similar apps, explaining that they could potentially be used to target law enforcement officials. The company says the apps violate section 1.1.1 of its app store guidelines, which prohibits “[d]efamatory, discriminatory, or mean-spirited content, including references or commentary about … targeted groups, particularly if the app is likely to humiliate, intimidate or place a targeted individual or group in harm’s way.”
Apple didn’t immediately respond to a request for additional information.
And it wasn’t just Apple. Meta removed a Facebook group with 80,000 members called ICE Sighting-Chicagoland at the request (or demand) of the government. Chicago residents had been using the apps to warn neighbors when the masked federal agents were near area schools, grocery stores, and other community locations.
Google removed an ICE tracking app called Red Dot from its Google Play store, saying the app violated its policy against apps that share the location of what it describes as a “vulnerable group.”
Bondi vowed to “continue engaging tech companies” on the issue. But how the government engages matters, explains Mario Trujillo, one of the EFF attorneys who filed the lawsuit.
“This has a lot of first amendment issues, and there’s this narrow line between permissible government persuasion and then impermissible unconstitutional coercion,” Trujillo says. “To really understand whether or not the government violated the first amendment, you really have to analyze the actual conversations.”
Trujillo says the language and tone used by the government also matters. “Was there an implicit threat or the threat of consequences if they didn’t do something?”.
The EFF says people have a protected First Amendment right to document and share information about law enforcement activities performed in public. If government officials coerce third parties into suppressing protected activity, the group says, this can be unconstitutional, as the government cannot do indirectly what it is barred from doing directly.
In October, the EFF submitted a Freedom of Information Act request with the DOJ, the DHS agencies (including ICE) asking for the communications with the tech companies. None of the agencies responded, so EFF filed suit to compel the release of the records, Trujillo says.
Trujillo adds that it’s likely that other advocacy groups or media outlets have submitted similar FOIAs. Whoever succeeds in getting the communication records will make them public. If the communications reveal that the government coerced or threatened the tech companies, the stage may be set for a First Amendment lawsuit against the government.
The developer of the ICEBlock app, Joshua Aaron, believes the removal of his app is a violation of his First Amendment rights, and intends to fight Apple’s decision in court. Attempts to contact Aaron weren’t immediately successful.
“The app was thoroughly vetted for three weeks by Apple’s legal and senior officials before approval,” Aaron told Decrypt. “It’s been fine all this time. For them to do it now, that’s why I say I’m so disappointed.”