The FBI spied on a private Signal group chat of immigrants’ rights activists who were organizing “courtwatch” efforts in New York City this spring, law enforcement records shared with the Guardian indicate.
The FBI, the documents show, gained access to conversations in a “courtwatch” Signal group that helps coordinate volunteer activists who monitor public proceedings at three New York federal immigration courts. The US government has repeatedly been accused of violating immigrants’ due process rights at those courts.
A “joint situational information report” from the FBI and the New York police department (NYPD), dated 28 August 2025, quoted from a chat on Signal, the encrypted messaging app, and also characterized the court watchers as “anarchist violent extremist actors”. The two-page report was distributed to other law enforcement agencies across the US.
The records were obtained by Property of the People, a government transparency non-profit, through public records requests.
Activist groups have expanded efforts to observe and document courthouse activities in recent months as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has increasingly been detaining immigrants who have shown up to court for routine hearings. An ICE directive issued the day after Donald Trump took office in January established that agents could arrest immigrants at court; the practice had been restricted under the Biden administration due to concerns court arrests would interfere with “the fair administration of justice”.
In immigration courts across the country this year, the US government has repeatedly dismissed immigrants’ cases at their hearings, enabling federal agents to then arrest the immigrants in courthouse hallways, the Guardian previously reported. A recent Associated Press investigation suggested the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has set up “deportation traps” at the courts. A federal officer was filmed pushing a woman to the floor at a New York City courthouse in September, prompting a rare rebuke from DHS.
The FBI’s report from August, prepared by its New York division, does not make clear 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 if they are directly included in the chat, are sent copies from a participant or have access to a member’s unlocked phone.
The FBI said the information came from a “sensitive source with excellent access” and introduced the report as a warning about “extremist actors targeting law enforcement officers and federal facilities”.
In “late May”, an individual “participated in a debrief session held via a Signal call within the ‘courtwatch’ Signal groupchat”, the FBI wrote, without identifying the individual or the specific group or organizations involved. That person “discussed how to improve future activities 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.
“Collecting media of activities was ‘critical information’; media included photos and videos of law enforcement officers including their badges, faces, names, license plates, law enforcement vehicles, and the interior of federal facilities,” the FBI wrote, summarizing the conversations.
Discussions in the chat included “instructions on where to go and what to say in order to gain access to federal courtrooms”, with the FBI noting that members of the group were told which floors to visit and to tell officials they were there to observe, with statements like: “I’m due at a 9:30 hearing.”
The FBI added: “‘Courtwatch’ is a private/invite only, encrypted Signal application group chat created by the identified [individual]. In private encrypted online chats, the identified [individual] is known to instruct 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 did not provide any further details about the individual or their alleged past calls for violence and offered no specifics or evidence to explain why the FBI characterized them as “anarchist violent extremists”. The court watch efforts have been nonviolent, and the FBI did not respond to an inquiry seeking specific examples of violence and did not answer questions about whether law enforcement had ongoing access to the private group.
Hearings at immigration court, which is run by the Department of Justice (DoJ), are open to the public and observers do not have to inform the courts in advance of their attendance.
It’s unclear whether specific groups were targeted by the Signal surveillance. Volunteers with a range of immigrants’ rights organizations and grassroots groups have been involved in New York immigration court watching, which has become a common practice in cities across the country as DHS arrests have escalated.
Brad Lander, New York City’s comptroller, was arrested by ICE in June inside an immigration courthouse while accompanying an immigrant New Yorker. The former mayoral candidate, who has regularly participated in court watching, condemned the FBI’s report in a statement, saying the “FBI surveillance tactic is ripped straight out of the J Edgar Hoover playbook”, referring to the longtime former FBI director known for his spying and attacks on activists.
“Observing immigration court hearings is a legal and non-violent act, unlike the ICE abductions we have witnessed regularly for months outside of the courtrooms,” Lander said. “The mission of courtwatch is to provide transparency and ensure people are not disappeared without due process – surveillance and intimidation by Trump’s corrupted Justice Department won’t stop us from showing up to protect our neighbors and the rule of law.”
“Basic civic participation is not a terrorist threat,” added Dr Ryan Shapiro, executive director of Property of the People, in a statement. “The FBI treating it like one is yet another example of the Trump regime’s profound contempt for even the most rudimentary of democratic freedoms.”
Natalie Baldassarre, a DoJ spokesperson, did not respond to questions about the 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 Department of Justice is restoring integrity to 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 counsel with DHS, said the FBI report was part of a pattern of the US government criminalizing free speech activities. He noted Tom Homan, White House border czar, stating earlier this year that “know your rights” trainings could be considered impeding law enforcement; DHS arresting people filming immigration agents; and Trump signing an executive order designating “antifa”, the decentralized antifascist movement, a “domestic terrorist organization”, raising fears of a broad crackdown on leftist activism.
“The US government is turning these powerful national security agencies towards critics and people who are standing up for the rights of immigrants, 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, and public access to our courts, are lawful and protected by our rights in the US constitution, yet routinely we’re seeing federal officials portray efforts to obtain basic accountability as threats.”
FBI surveillance of this nature is not subject to significant oversight and there are limited guardrails to prevent abuses of people’s rights, Reynolds added.
Reynolds likened the 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 noted, can lead to conflicts among activists and increasing distrust: “There is a significant risk of chilling and undermining these sorts of private discussion environments.”
