For
years,
we’ve
been
subjected
to
an
endless
parade
of
hyperventilating
claims
about
the
Biden
administration’s
supposed
“censorship
industrial
complex.”
We
were
told,
over
and
over
again,
that
the
government
was
weaponizing
its
power
to
silence
conservative
speech.
The
evidence
for
this?
Some
angry
emails
from
White
House
staffers
that
Facebook
ignored.
That
was
basically
it.
The
Supreme
Court
looked
at
it
and
said
there
was
no
standing
because
there
was no
evidence
of
coercion (and
even
suggested
that
the
plaintiffs
had
fabricated
some
of
the
facts,
unsupported
by
reality).
But
now
we
have
actual,
documented
cases
of
the
federal
government
using
its
surveillance
apparatus
to
track
down
and
intimidate
Americans
for
nothing
more
than
criticizing
government
policy.
And
wouldn’t
you
know
it,
the
same
people
who
spent
years
screaming
about
censorship
are
suddenly
very
quiet.
If
any
of
the
following
stories
had
happened
under
the
Biden
administration,
you’d
hear
screams
from
the
likes
of
Matt
Taibbi,
Bari
Weiss,
and
Michael
Shellenberger,
about
the
crushing
boot
of
the
government
trying
to
silence
speech.
But
somehow…
nothing.
Weiss
is
otherwise
occupied—busy stripping
CBS
News
for
parts to
please
King
Trump.
And
the
dude
bros
who
invented
the
“censorship
industrial
complex”
out
of
their
imaginations?
Pretty
damn
quiet
about
stories
like
the
following.
Taibbi
is
spending
his
time
trying
to
play
down
the
Epstein
files
and
claiming
Meta
blocking
ICE
apps
on
direct
request
from
DHS
isn’t
censorship
because
he
hasn’t
seen
any
evidence
that
it’s
because
of
the
federal
government.
Dude.
Pam
Bondi
publicly
stated she
called
Meta to
have
them
removed.
Shellenberger,
who
is
now
somehow
a
“free
speech
professor”
at
Bari
Weiss’ collapsing
fake
university,
seems
to
just
be
posting
non-stop
conspiracy
theory
nonsense
from
cranks.
Let’s
start
with
the
case
that
should
make
your
blood
boil.
The
Washington
Post
reports
that
a
67-year-old
retired
Philadelphia
man
—
a
naturalized
U.S.
citizen
originally
from
the
UK
— found
himself
in
the
crosshairs of
the
Department
of
Homeland
Security
after
he
committed
the
apparently
unforgivable
sin
of…
sending
a
polite
email
to
a
government
lawyer
asking
for
mercy
in
a
deportation
case.
Here’s
what
he
wrote
to
a
prosecutor
who
was
trying
to
deport
an
Afghani
man
who
feared
the
Taliban
would
take
his
life
if
sent
there.
The
Philadelphia
resident
found
the
prosecutors
email
and
sent
the
following:
“Mr.
Dernbach,
don’t
play
Russian
roulette
with
H’s
life.
Err
on
the
side
of
caution.
There’s
a
reason
the
US
government
along
with
many
other
governments
don’t
recognise
the
Taliban.
Apply
principles
of
common
sense
and
decency.”
That’s
it.
That’s
the
email
that
triggered
a
federal
response.
Within
hours
— hours —
of
sending
this
email,
Google
notified
him
that
DHS
had
issued
an
administrative
subpoena
demanding
his
personal
information.
Days
later,
federal
agents
showed
up
at
his
door.
Showed.
Up.
At.
His.
Door.
A
retired
guy
sends
a
respectful
email
asking
the
government
to
be
careful
with
someone’s
life,
and
within
the
same
day,
the
surveillance
apparatus
is
mobilized
against
him.
The
tool
being
weaponized
here
is
the
administrative
subpoena
(something we’ve
been
calling
out for
well
over
a
decade,
under
administrations
of
both
parties)
which
is
a
particularly
insidious
instrument
because
it
doesn’t
require
a
judge’s
approval.
Unlike
a
judicial
subpoena,
where
investigators
have
to
show
a
judge
enough
evidence
to
justify
the
search,
administrative
subpoenas
are
essentially
self-signed
permission
slips.
As TechCrunch
explains:
Unlike
judicial
subpoenas,
which
are
authorized
by
a
judge
after
seeing
enough
evidence
of
a
crime
to
authorize
a
search
or
seizure
of
someone’s
things,
administrative
subpoenas
are
issued
by
federal
agencies,
allowing
investigators
to
seek
a
wealth
of
information
about
individuals
from
tech
and
phone
companies
without
a
judge’s
oversight.
While
administrative
subpoenas
cannot
be
used
to
obtain
the
contents
of
a person’s
emails,
online
searches,
or
location
data,
they
can
demand
information
specifically
about
the
user,
such
as
what
time
a
user
logs
in,
from
where,
using
which
devices,
and
revealing
the
addresses
and
other
identifiable
information
about
who
opened
an
online
account.
But
because
administrative
subpoenas
are
not
backed
by
a
judge’s
authority
or
a
court’s
order,
it’s
largely
up
to
a
company
whether
to
give
over
any
data
to
the
requesting
government
agency.
The
Philadelphia
retiree’s
case
would
be
alarming
enough
if
it
were
a
one-off.
It’s
not.
Bloomberg
has
reported
on at
least
five
cases
where
DHS
used
administrative
subpoenas to
try
to
unmask
anonymous
Instagram
accounts
that
were
simply documenting
ICE
raids in
their
communities.
One
account,
@montcowatch,
was
targeted
simply
for
sharing
resources
about
immigrant
rights
in
Montgomery
County,
Pennsylvania.
The
justification?
A
claim
that
ICE
agents
were
being
“stalked”
—
for
which
there
was
no
actual
evidence.
The
ACLU,
which
is
now
representing
several
of
these
targeted
individuals,
isn’t
mincing
words:
“It
doesn’t
take
that
much
to
make
people
look
over
their
shoulder,
to
think
twice
before
they
speak
again.
That’s
why
these
kinds
of
subpoenas
and
other
actions—the
visits—are
so
pernicious.
You
don’t
have
to
lock
somebody
up
to
make
them
reticent
to
make
their
voice
heard.
It
really
doesn’t
take
much,
because
the
power
of
the
federal
government
is
so
overwhelming.”
This
is
textbook
chilling
effects
on
speech.
Remember,
it
was
just
a
year
and
a
half
ago
in Murthy
v.
Missouri,
the
Supreme
Court
found
no
First
Amendment
violation
when
the
Biden
administration
sent
emails
to
social
media
platforms—in
part
because
the
platforms
felt
entirely
free
to
say
no.
The
platforms
weren’t
coerced;
they
could
ignore
the
requests
and
did.
Now
consider
the
Philadelphia
retiree.
He
sends
one
polite
email.
Within
hours,
DHS
has
mobilized
to
unmask
him.
Days
later,
federal
agents
are
at
his
door.
Does
that
sound
like
someone
who’s
free
to
speak
his
mind
without
consequence?
Even
if
you
felt
that
what
the
Biden
admin
did
was
inappropriate,
it
didn’t
involve
federal
agents
showing
up
at
people’s
homes.
That
is
what
actual
government
suppression
of
speech
looks
like.
Not
mean
tweets
from
press
secretaries
that
platforms
ignored,
but
federal
agents
showing
up
at
your
door
because
you
sent
an
(perfectly
nice)
email
the
government
didn’t
like.
So
we
have
DHS
mobilizing
within
hours
to
identify
a
67-year-old
retiree
who
sent
a
polite
email.
We
have
agents
showing
up
at
citizens’
homes
to
interrogate
them
about
their
protected
speech.
We
have
the
government
trying
to
unmask
anonymous
accounts
that
are
documenting
law
enforcement
activities
—
something
that
is
unambiguously
protected
under
the
First
Amendment.
Recording
police,
sharing
that
recording,
and
doing
so
anonymously
is
legal.
It’s
protected
speech.
And
the
government
is
using
administrative
subpoenas
to
try
to
identify
and
intimidate
the
people
doing
it.
For
years,
we
heard
that
government
officials
sending
emails
to
social
media
companies
—
emails
the
companies
ignored
—
constituted
an
existential
threat
to
the
First
Amendment.
But
when
the
government
actually
uses
its
coercive
power
to
track
down,
identify,
and
intimidate
citizens
for
their
speech?
Crickets.
This
is
what
a
real
threat
to
free
speech
looks
like.
Not
“jawboning”
that
platforms
can
easily
refuse,
but
the
full
weight
of
federal
surveillance
being
deployed
against
anyone
who
dares
to
criticize
the
administration.
The
chilling
effect
here
is
the
entire
point.
As
the
ACLU
noted,
this
appears
to
be
“part
of
a
broader
strategy
to
intimidate
people
who
document
immigration
activity
or
criticize
government
actions.”
If
you
spent
the
last
few
years
warning
about
government
censorship,
this
is
your
moment.
This
is
the
actual
thing
you
claimed
to
be
worried
about.
But,
of
course,
all
those
who
pretended
to
care
about
free
speech
really
only
meant
they
cared
about
their
own
team’s
speech.
Watching
the
government
actually
suppress
critics?
No
big
deal.
They
probably
deserved
it.
DHS
Is
Hunting
Down
Trump
Critics.
The
‘Free
Speech’
Warriors
Are
Mighty
Quiet.
More
Law-Related
Stories
From
Techdirt:
How
“Bitcoin
Jesus”
Avoided
Prison,
Thanks
To
One
Of
The
“Friends
Of
Trump”
The
Full
Orwell:
DOJ
Weaponization
Working
Group
Finally
Gets
Off
The
Ground
Measles
Has
Now
Begun
To
Infect
Immigrant
Detention
Camps