ICEblock: The Battle for Protected Speech

During the previous summer, Joshua Aaron introduced ICEBlock, an application that swiftly climbed to the top of Apple’s App Store rankings. Modeled after the well-known navigation app, Waze, ICEBlock gathered updates from users about ICE sightings within a 5-mile radius of their location.

High-profile US officials such as Attorney General Pam Bondi and ICE director Todd Lyons immediately criticized ICEBlock, alleging that the app encouraged violence, obstructed law enforcement, and endangered agents. Additional backlash from the Trump administration ensued, with US Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem branding the app as an “obstruction of justice” and announcing plans to pursue legal action against the creators.

Attorney General Bondi issued a warning to Aaron in a Fox News interview, cautioning him to be alert. Subsequently, Aaron’s spouse was terminated from her auditing role at DHS. Following a brief hiatus, Apple yielded to pressure from the Trump administration and removed ICEBlock from the App Store. Several former Apple employees expressed disapproval of what they perceived as Apple succumbing to political influence. A veteran employee of 22 years even penned an open letter to Apple’s CEO Tim Cook.

Despite new users being unable to download the app, there is speculation that ICEBlock still functions on iOS devices. Presently, ICEBlock has filed a federal complaint in the District of Columbia seeking a jury trial. The complaint alleges unconstitutional threats against Apple and Aaron, as well as a violation of his First Amendment rights. According to the filing, “For what seems to be the first instance in Apple’s nearly fifty-year history, Apple removed a U.S.-based app at the behest of the U.S. government.”

The Trump administration continues to demand explanations. Although ICEBlock was removed by Apple and was exclusive to iOS, both the App Store and Google Play have come under scrutiny; reports indicate that both Apple and Google have eliminated similar tracking apps.

Recently, the House Committee on Homeland Security dispatched letters to Tim Cook and Google’s CEO, Sundar Pichai, requesting information on the measures the companies are taking to eliminate apps that track ICE agents. The letters acknowledged the importance of free speech but highlighted that it does not encompass speech intended to incite imminent unlawful actions likely to occur. This legal boundary was established in the 1969 Supreme Court case Brandenburg v. Ohio.

Irrespective of one’s stance on the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies, the case of ICEBlock holds significant implications for future app developers and First Amendment rights. Courts have traditionally applied the Brandenburg test narrowly. If the case proceeds to trial, the government will need to demonstrate that ICEBlock was explicitly designed to incite immediate unlawful behavior and had the potential to cause it. It will be challenging to prove that passive data crowdsourcing amounts to inciting imminent violence. Courts typically uphold political speech vigorously. Should ICEBlock have its day in court, the government is likely to encounter formidable opposition.

global $wp;
. ‘/’;

??>