Did you buy a beanie from REI recently? If so, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) might have a surprising interest in you.
Court documents reveal that in March, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) issued a subpoena to the outdoor retailer REI, seeking purchase records for a particular dark green beanie from individuals in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area over the past two years. The specific beanie in question can be found on REI’s website, but the retailer has not disclosed whether they complied with the subpoena or how many individuals may be involved.
This subpoena is part of a larger legal case against 39 individuals who participated in a protest against ICE at a church where the pastor, who also served as an acting ICE field office director, was leading the service. The defendants include both protesters and journalists, among them former CNN anchor Don Lemon.
The records request to REI was among 92 subpoenas that HSI sent out during its investigation. Other companies targeted included social media businesses, airlines, telecommunications firms, and a state employment agency. Notably, one subpoena directed at an unnamed airline demanded not only past flight details for a defendant but also a "lookout notification" for any future travel.
These subpoenas, known as 1509 customs summonses, are intended for inquiries related to imports and exports. However, since the Trump administration, there have been reports of DHS leveraging this tool to expose online critics without judicial oversight. U.S. Senator Ron Wyden sharply criticized the move, labeling it as an unreasonable overreach of the DHS’s power. He firmly stated that customs summonses should not be used as tools for broad investigations into individuals critical of government policy.
The exact number of 1509 summonses issued since the Trump era remains unclear, as recipients are often sworn to secrecy. When the public learns of these requests, it’s typically due to a legal challenge from those targeted. Companies often navigate these demands differently—while some, like Google, have resisted compliance when they deem the requests overly broad, others, such as T-Mobile, have allegedly handed over extensive customer data without notifying affected individuals.
Internal communications and court filings indicate a mixed response among companies facing such summons. For example, while T-Mobile faced backlash after revealing it provided detailed call logs of one of the defendants without prior notification, Reddit successfully objected to subpoenas exploring user identities related to anti-ICE content, leading to their withdrawal.
The ongoing situation exemplifies the tension between national security interests and individual privacy rights. Critics argue for the necessity of legislative safeguards to ensure that such investigative methods are not misused, leaving corporations and individuals caught in the crosshairs of broad data requests.
