Federal agents track down woman, demand she remove Instagram post about ICE

https://www.syracuse.com/news/2026/06/federal-agents-track-down-syracuse-woman-demand-she-remove-instagram-post-about-ice.html

by coloneltcb • 27 days ago

217 57 27 days ago

syracuse.com

lokar4• 27 days ago

I know in CA it is a violation of election law for an armed law enforcement officer to enter a vote center unless they are responding to an incident or there to vote.

mingus88• 27 days ago

And what are the consequences if they do it anyway?

reactordev4• 27 days ago

Whose gonna call the cops on the cops?

lebuffon• 27 days ago

That, in my opinion, is the question of the era for the USA. We were taught that the rule of law prevailed and there are "checks and balances" but it seems like there is no prescibed way to enforce the rules inside the system.

jmclnx• 27 days ago

These days, I would guess a "tsk-tsk" is said to them.

The States need to grow a pair and start arresting these agents who break the law.

JumpCrisscross• 27 days ago

what are the consequences if they do it anyway?

State AGs seem to have collectively shrugged. But theoretically, a state charging a federal officer with unlawful conduct is precedented.

conartist6• 27 days ago

The content of the post deemed by ICE to warrant ~~federal prosecution~~ crime-boss-style intimidation:

BREAKING: The ICE agent who shot and killed Renee Good in broad daylight has been identified as Jonathan Ross by the Minnesota Star Tribune. I think today is a great day for Johnathan to be indicted!

If anyone is wondering, it would still be a good day : )

laweijfmvo2• 27 days ago

I don’t read the Minnesota Star and hadn’t seen any of this, so, if anything the Feds doxxed their own by bringing it to my attention.

skeledrew2• 27 days ago

Streisand!

mattnewton• 27 days ago

_in a polling place_ no less

panny• 27 days ago

Maybe you should ask them for an ID to make sure they belong there.

axus• 27 days ago

I see they were invited in by the person they wanted to intimidate, so that she wouldn't be alone, and there were no voters present. "Better judgement" would have been to not invite them and to not accept the invitation, but after the fact I could say it's preferable to the alternative. The person who decided to take action against this lady should be fired though.

fanatic2pope• 27 days ago

I wonder how far we are away from people being arrested for holding up blank pieces of paper.

reactordev4• 27 days ago

I mean, if we are going to go after people for their tweets and posts, there’s a social network that needs crawling…

dgellow2• 27 days ago

Happened in 2023 in the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blank_paper_protest

graemep2• 27 days ago

The UK case involved him being "lead away" by police and "detained" when he returned and spoke so not really an arrest for holding up a blank piece of paper. Not good by any means, but not quite "for holding up a blank piece of paper". The other UK case was about a threat of arrest if he wrote on the paper - that is under the law that bans protests in Parliament Square. Again, not good, but not for holding up a blank piece of paper.

mrhottakes• 27 days ago

The facts in your link contradict your post

trelane• 27 days ago

Or praying silently to yourself in a No Praying Zone!

delichon• 27 days ago

This kind of intimidation sucks and I'd like to see individual officers who indulge in it lose their qualified immunity and be prosecuted for it.

But I'm at least grateful to live under a regime that needs to break its own laws to do this, and so such charges can be dismissed by courts that follow the law, even if they don't apply consequences to the offending officials. Compare that to the UK where more than 12k people were arrested for social media posts in 2023 alone and where it is fully permitted under the law with great discretion and supported by the courts.

It's a bit like "my husband is better than yours because he doesn't beat me as hard", but it's something.

Steve163843• 27 days ago

Which of the 12K arrests do you not agree with? Or are you saying people should be free to write whatever they want on social media with no repercussions?

bryceacc• 27 days ago

Or are you saying people should be free to write whatever they want on social media with no repercussions?

no repercussions from the government, yes, people should be free to write whatever they want

inglor_cz• 27 days ago

Most countries in the West have higher threshold to arrest someone over social media posts. Some actually much, much higher.

12K is just a ridiculous number and indicates that the UK indeed has a free speech problem. I don't think that in my country there were more like ~ 20 actual arrests over the same problem during the same period.

Even if you agree with prosecuting people for speech, why exactly would you arrest them and drag them to prison/jail? Even here in Europe, this is a sort of offense that usually results in a suspended sentence or a fine, and a physical arrest is absolutely unnecessary, unless there is a good suspicion that that person is going to harm some concrete people at a concrete time.

In a more liberal country, even if prosecution over an utterance takes place, it usually happens without arrests, simply by asking the culprit to come to a police station and explain themselves, later the same in front of a court. There just isn't any need for physical restraining of that person, it is just intimidation.

vitally3643• 27 days ago

Saying what you want about the government without fear of reprecussion or intimidation or consequence from the government is literally in the constitution. Very specifically for this situation.

This isn't a "freespeach" argument, this is the actual text of the actual constitution. This is the actual literal reason that line is included in the bill of rights. It is explicit constitutional law that the government cannot punish you for criticizing the government.

There are a ton of exceptions to our right to free speech, but this is not one.

lux-lux-lux• 27 days ago

Given the costs of defending a federal case start at the five figs and the typical naughty tweets style offense nets community service at worst, I’m not so sure.

ben_w2• 25 days ago

"Typical" doesn't fit with "at worst".

The former may well be as you say, though when I tried to find real stats I was unable to tell what the breakdown of offence was let alone punishments (if someone has an official link, not opinion piece, I'd be interested).

All I do know is that one of the more famous cases is that kind of scale, total penalty being £985 including costs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_joke_trial

rambojohnson• 27 days ago

in what world do you think they would actually be prosecuted?

dualvariable• 27 days ago

The 12k number is an estimate, and only 1k were convicted. And the law they're being charged with breaking covers things like threats to assault someone, false bomb threats, harassment of ex-partners, threats sent to MPs, serious domestic abuse-related crimes, etc. There's no breakdown of what each charge was for.

If you make a bomb threat or threaten to kill someone else over social media, you really should get arrested and prosecuted because that isn't an exercise of "first amendment rights".

ben_w2• 25 days ago

But I'm at least grateful to live under a regime that needs to break its own laws to do this

Actions speak louder than words.

He's a (translated) quote from a constitution; the country it is from has no qualms about breaking it. I am confident you, as a lover of freedom, would not wish to live there:

  Article 67. Citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech, the press, assembly, demonstration and association.
  The State shall guarantee the conditions for the free activities of democratic political parties and social organizations.

- https://archive.org/details/constitution_202002/page/n21/mod...

josefritzishere• 27 days ago

The US regime's effort to avoid any culpability for killing American citizens is very concerning.

OutOfHere• 27 days ago

More broadly, across various instances, the administration and feds have been coming out strongly against basic freedom of speech which is a core constitutional pillar that defines America. It is highly unAmerican.

Meanwhile, the crook in charge keeps doing everything he can to keep his cronies rich, at the expense of the planet's climate. Those who voted for him continue to remain utterly uninformed of the tornadoes and floods they sow.

rekabis• 27 days ago

How is this anything other than a flagrant violation of her constitutional right to free speech? This is the government suppressing her speaking the name of the executioner, which was already publicly published.

If I was her, I would be launching a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the government for a violation of constitutional rights.

anonymousiam• 27 days ago

Was it against the law for them to ASK that she remove her post? In essence, it was a request, coupled with an unrelated statement about the illegality of interfering with federal officers. Yes, it was an attempt to intimidate her, but she recognized it for what it was and did not cave in.

Doxxing has many forms, and I agree that she did nothing wrong by citing the news source with the officers name, and offering her opinion. They did not detain or arrest her, and she agreed, and even invited them to speak with her.

This whole thing is a non-story.

anonymous_user9• 27 days ago

Was it against the law for them to ASK
Yes, it was an attempt to intimidate her

You've answered your own question

sleight42• 27 days ago

7 hours old and not flagged? Amazing.

paleotrope2• 27 days ago

She claims that the post with his name is the one that triggered the visit.

paleotrope2• 27 days ago

I remember the good ole days when the White House would coordinate with former employees that got jobs with SV companies in their "online safety" orgs and would just ban or shadowban people. Less legally suspect because it was action by private companies.

NuclearPM• 27 days ago

When is the tipping point?

martiehenry111• 25 days ago

What happened to freedom of speech? Before you know it we won't have any freedom at all. They had no right to track her down. We can't let this continue, something has to be done.

Federal agents track down woman, demand she remove Instagram post about ICE

Related Stories