Spyware tools being used by ICE are raising concerns about the privacy rights and safety of U.S. citizens, particularly more vulnerable Black and brown Americans.
According to an NPR report, Todd Lyons, the acting director of ICE, confirmed in a letter that the immigration enforcement agency, including Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), is using various spyware tools that can intercept encrypted messages on mobile platforms like WhatsApp. ICE claims that the tools are being used to go after terrorist organizations—especially traffickers of fentanyl.
In a letter to members of Congress on the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Lyons explains that he approved HSI’s “use of cutting-edge technological tools that address the specific challenges posed by the Foreign Terrorist Organizations’ thriving exploitation of encrypted communication platforms.” The ICE chief said the approval is “in response to the unprecedented lethality of fentanyl and the exploitation of digital platforms by transnational criminal organizations.”
But as with any government use of surveillance, ICE’s use of the spyware tool Graphite, owned by the Israeli company Paragon Solutions, raises questions about constitutional rights. Lawmakers and experts say they are concerned that, given ICE’s alleged abuses in carrying out President Trump’s aggressive immigration enforcement, the federal law enforcement agency will misuse the tool to target innocent civilians or those who are critical of the administration’s policies.
U.S. Rep. Summer Lee, D-Pa., who joined members of Congress in a letter raising these concerns to Director Lyons, told NPR that ICE is moving forward with “invasive spyware technology inside the United States,” adding, “The people most at risk, including immigrants, Black and brown communities, journalists, organizers, and anyone speaking out against government abuse, deserve more than secrecy and deflection from an agency with a long record of overreach and abuse.”
The federal government has had a contract with Paragon Solutions for the use of Graphite since 2024 under President Joe Biden. The contract was put on pause to comply with an executive order by Biden that prohibited the use of any commercial spyware that poses a risk to national security, including misuse by foreign governments. The Trump administration has since revived the contract.
The agency initially signed a $2 million contract with Paragon Solutions for an unspecified software product at the end of the Biden administration. But the contract was swiftly paused until it was revived by the Trump administration last fall. Graphite uses “zero click” technology to gain access to encrypted messages on a targeted device. But Graphite’s technology has been called into question for targeting journalists and members of civil society in several countries.
What’s more, the inclusion of Graphite coincides with other technologies used by ICE, including apps that allow federal agents to point a cell phone at someone’s face to potentially identify them and determine their immigration status in the field, and another that can scan irises. These tools are all used to implement President Trump’s mass deportation goals. ICE has come under great scrutiny in recent months, following two U.S. citizens being fatally shot on camera and countless other U.S. citizens claiming to have been victims of abuses by ICE agents.
Lyons told members of Congress that the Graphite spyware tool “will comply with constitutional requirements” and be coordinated with the ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor. However, that doesn’t quell the concerns from advocates and experts who say the use of such technology is a slippery slope.
“The biggest concern now is that Lyons’ response doesn’t rule out ICE using an administrative subpoena to deploy this malware against people living in the United States as part of their ideological battle against constitutionally protected protest,” Cooper Quintin, senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told NPR.
He added, “An extremely invasive surveillance capability such as this should require the strongest judicial oversight and confirmation that such intrusion is necessary and [a] proportionate response to the crime being investigated.”
