The Department of Homeland Security gathered data on observers of immigration enforcement activities and retaliated against them in violation of the First Amendment and other federal law, according to a lawsuit filed Friday.Electronic Privacy Information Center and three individual observers said that the department’s Protester Surveillance Policy should be declared illegal and blocked by the US District Court for the Southern District of California. DHS deployed “a dragnet of drones, body cams, face-scanning apps, license-plate scanners, and camera phones” to consolidate data on protesters, the lawsuit said, citing public reports. Immigration and Customs Enforcement also told a Democratic congressman that it collects identifying information on people potentially obstructing ICE operations, the suit said.The three individual plaintiffs — from Minnesota, South Carolina, and California — said that after their involvement in legal observation, the government revoked their Trusted Traveler status under either Global Entry or TSA pre-check. They believe DHS revoked their status in retaliation against their protest activity.Federal agencies are forbidden by the Privacy Act from collecting personally identifying information on those exercising their First Amendment rights, from maintaining such records unnecessary to accomplish an agency purpose, and from not providing public notice and justification for collecting that data, the complaint said. The policy also runs counter to the Administrative Procedure Act, and the alleged retaliation is a First Amendment violation, the suit said. “Global Entry or other CBP Trusted Traveler Program memberships are not revoked because someone exercises their First Amendment rights,” according to a Customs and Border Protection spokesperson. The statement said that membership could be revoked for pending charges or warrants, violation of immigration laws, inability to demonstrate low-risk traveler status, or related reasons.The statement directed people who believed their status was revoked in error or without new information to request a review. “Applicants must still demonstrate low-risk status.”The plaintiffs want a court to require DHS return toprior policies restricting federal agency collection of personal data, and to delete all personal data it impermissibly collected. Democracy Forward Foundation and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP represent the plaintiffs.The case is Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. Mullin, S.D. Cal., No. 3:26-cv-04232, complaint filed 7/24/26. Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading: See Breaking News in Context Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis. Already a subscriber? Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.