DHS ICE Bodycam Footage: Why They’re Refusing to Release It
- Lauren harper is Freedom of the Press Foundation's first Daniel Ellsberg Chair on Government Secrecy.
- The Department of Homeland Security claimed four times within 48 hours that it had "no documents" in response to records requests from the Freedom of the Press Foundation...
- Each of our Freedom of Information Act requests was for records likely to exist,and any single "no records" response would have been suspicious.
Lauren harper is Freedom of the Press Foundation’s first Daniel Ellsberg Chair on Government Secrecy.
The Department of Homeland Security claimed four times within 48 hours that it had “no documents” in response to records requests from the Freedom of the Press Foundation late last year.These brush-offs raise serious questions about whether the agency is saving its documents anymore, much less creating them in the first place.
Each of our Freedom of Information Act requests was for records likely to exist,and any single “no records” response would have been suspicious. But four in rapid succession is enough to cast doubt on Homeland Security’s record-keeping practices and its compliance with the Freedom of Information Act.
These are the records we asked for and DHS claims it simply doesn’t have.
All emails sent or received by DHS Secretary Kristi noem containing the terms “CNN” and ”ICEBlock”
Table of Contents
DHS responded on December 11 it couldn’t find any records about this attempt to intimidate the press from reporting on ICE. This dubious claim came even though Noem said publicly this summer that she was in communication with Attorney General Pam Bondi about prosecuting CNN for reporting on ICEBlock, a crowdsourced application that tracks ICE sightings.
It’s a little hard to see how Noem could have worked with Bondi on potential legal action against both entities without mentioning them by name. It’s similarly arduous to imagine that nobody else within DHS, including its Office of General Counsel, emailed Noem to advise or ask questions on the potential prosecution.
One explanation is that Noem’s summer claim was just bluster. Another is that the DHS search wasn’t as thorough as the agency claimed. Yet another possibility is that these discussions happened over third-party applications, like Signal, and were never forwarded to official accounts.
Many agencies’ records management rules do allow for the use of third-party platforms, but Biden-era guidance from the National Archives and Records Administration requires these messages be forwarded to official accounts wear body cameras but not every ICE agent does; why ICE is not outfitting agents in an active enforcement operation with cameras, in apparent violation of the agency’s body camera policy; and why ICE isn’t using any of its massive new budget to cover the costs of body cameras for officials.
The request the Secret Service made to the Army Corps of Engineers to raise the water level of an Ohio river to ensure JD Vance had a nice kayaking trip
The Secret Service said on December 10 it had no relevant documents, even though the agency publicly acknowledged in August that it had coordinated with the Army Corps of Engineers about Vice President JD Vance’s trip, and geological reports showed a change in the water level coinciding with the Vance family’s vacation.
Did the Secret Service really never request that the water level be changed, or is the agency concealing information that might show Vance was “possibly exploiting public infrastructure resources for his personal recreation,” as The Guardian put it, at the same time the administration was drastically cutting funds to outdoor agencies, including the National Park Service?
In a separate FOIA request for records about the construction of the White House ballroom, the Secret service didn’t even bother to conduct a search. Instead, it said the records I sought might already be publicly available on federal contracting websites, or would be considered presidential records and not subject to release under FOIA until five years after the end of this Trump administration. It then closed the FOIA request without offering any right to appeal. I appealed anyway,noting it was unlikely that every record I sought would fit the definition of a The Department of Homeland security is legally obligated to respond to FOIA requests,providing access to government records unless specifically exempted by law. The FOIA, enacted in 1967, provides the public the right to request existing agency records. The Department of Justice provides guidance on FOIA compliance for federal agencies. Recent concerns center on allegations that DHS may be circumventing its FOIA obligations by consistently stating it possesses no records responsive to certain requests. This practice raises questions about the agency’s record-keeping practices and its commitment to transparency. For example,the Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) has reported difficulties obtaining records from DHS,with the agency frequently claiming no records exist. The FPF reported that DHS officials were fired shortly after releasing information obtained thru FOIA requests that challenged the government’s public statements. The Freedom of Information Act grants any person the right to request access to federal agency records. The Department of Justice’s FOIA Guide details the process and requirements for agencies to comply with these requests. Concerns have been raised that DHS’s responses, especially the frequent assertion of “no records,” may constitute obstruction of the FOIA process. This is especially troubling when coupled with reports of FOIA officials being removed after releasing information that contradicted the government’s narrative. Such actions could create a chilling effect, discouraging officials from fulfilling FOIA requests in a timely and thorough manner. According to the Freedom of the Press Foundation, DHS officials involved in releasing records countering the government’s narrative were later fired, raising concerns about retaliation and the suppression of information. Accountability within the Department of Homeland Security relies on transparency and the ability to review agency actions. The DHS mission statement emphasizes security, but also includes a commitment to the rule of law. If DHS consistently lacks records related to FOIA requests, it suggests a broader issue with governance and record-keeping practices. A federal agency unable to demonstrate its work cannot be effectively held accountable by the public or oversight bodies. As of January 10, 2024, there have been no official statements from DHS directly addressing the allegations of retaliatory firings or systemic issues with FOIA compliance. Though, the FOIA law mandates agency responses and provides avenues for appeal if requests are improperly denied.Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Potential Obstruction
DHS Leadership and Accountability