Voting was already underway when Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrived at a polling site in Syracuse, New York, during the state’s primaries in June. The agents were there to see Paigelynne Gonyea, a poll worker who says they were concerned about an Instagram post she had allegedly made in January “doxing” an ICE agent. The only post she could find was one crediting the Minnesota Star Tribune for identifying Jonathan Ross, the ICE agent who shot and killed Renee Good during the federal incursion in Minneapolis, and calling for his indictment. The agents at the poll site asked Gonyea to sign a warning notice stating it was unlawful to “threaten to assault, kidnap and/or murder” federal officials or their immediate family members in an effort to impede that official’s work. The form also requested that she remove her post “and/or discontinue” her behavior. “My signature would have been an admission of guilt,” Gonyea says. “I refused to sign it.” ICE did not respond to a request for comment for this story.
The Syracuse Incident and OPR’s Expanding Role
The incident, first reported by local news outlet Syracuse.com, was unsettling in many ways, but one detail stood out to Gonyea: the warning notice said it was sent by ICE’s Office of Professional Responsibility. “That office is supposed to be for internal investigations,” says Gonyea, “and now they’re using their own internal departments on American civilians.” OPR is intended to act as an internal watchdog. It is responsible for inspecting detention facilities, investigating allegations of employee and contractor misconduct, and processing security checks for new applicants. On its site, it says it also protects against “external threats” by managing badge access to buildings and maintaining the agency’s network security. But court documents indicate that it now appears to be pursuing more civilians like Gonyea for what they say online.
131 Cases in 15 Months: The Scope of OPR’s Online Investigations
In a court declaration filed in April, an ICE official stated that between January 2025 and March 2026, OPR investigated 131 cases involving “incidents of doxing and threats directed towards ICE employees nationwide.” It remains unclear how many of those cases resulted in criminal charges. Only one instance has been publicly identified where OPR was credited for its investigative work in a case where the Justice Department accused a California man of harassing an ICE attorney and her mother. The DOJ alleged that the man pleaded guilty and used to live in the same building as the mother, starting his harassment campaign in January 2024 — well before President Trump took office. ICE did not respond to questions about whether other cases have been brought based on OPR’s work or how many additional cases OPR has opened since March.
First Amendment Concerns and Legal Pushback
“It takes a lot to actually convict someone for their speech, and it’s only possible in very limited circumstances,” says Laura Moraff, a staff attorney at the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. “People do have a First Amendment right to criticize the government and to do that online and to do that anonymously.” OPR was also behind at least one of the flurry of administrative subpoenas sent to tech companies in recent months in an effort to unmask online critics. In court filings, lawyers for the poster argued that the subpoena — which requested the poster’s name, address, telephone number, and other details — violated the poster’s right to free speech. The government withdrew the subpoena rather than trying to litigate its merits.
What This Means for Online Critics
The use of an internal affairs unit to pursue civilians for online speech marks a significant shift in how federal agencies may be leveraging their investigative resources. While threats of violence against federal officials are not protected speech, mere criticism or calls for accountability — including reposting publicly available information about an agent’s involvement in a controversial incident — fall squarely within First Amendment protections. The Syracuse case and the withdrawn subpoena suggest that OPR is testing the boundaries of its authority, and that at least some of these efforts have not withstood legal scrutiny.
What You Should Do If Contacted by OPR
If you are approached by ICE agents or receive a notice from OPR regarding online speech, do not sign any document without consulting an attorney. The warning notice in the Syracuse case was framed as an admission of guilt. Anyone who believes their First Amendment rights have been violated by federal subpoenas or surveillance requests should contact a civil liberties organization such as the ACLU. Using privacy tools like a reputable no-log VPN service, end-to-end encrypted messaging apps, and anonymous browsing tools can help protect your identity online, but they do not shield you from administrative subpoenas targeting your accounts. The most important step is to understand your rights: criticism of government officials is protected speech, and any attempt to chill that speech through federal investigation should be met with legal scrutiny.
