A recent report has revealed that Google supplied U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with extensive personal and financial information belonging to a student journalist, following an administrative subpoena that did not receive judicial approval.
The individual at the center of the case, Amandla Thomas-Johnson, is a British journalist who had been studying at Cornell University in New York. In 2024, he briefly attended a pro-Palestinian protest while enrolled at the university. Not long after, federal authorities reportedly sought access to details connected to his Google account.
According to the findings, Google provided ICE with a broad range of data. This reportedly included usernames, home addresses, and a breakdown of services associated with the account. Beyond that, authorities were given IP address logs, linked phone numbers, subscriber details, and even financial information such as credit card and bank account numbers tied to the account.
The subpoena that prompted the disclosure allegedly came with a gag order, preventing public discussion at the time. It did not clearly state why ICE was requesting the data. Thomas-Johnson has said that the government’s demand for his account information arrived within two hours of Cornell notifying him that his student visa had been revoked.
The case underscores the controversial use of administrative subpoenas by federal agencies. Unlike court-issued warrants, these subpoenas are authorized internally by government agencies without a judge’s sign-off. While they cannot require companies to hand over the contents of emails, search histories, or detailed location data, they can be used to obtain identifying details and metadata. Such information can potentially unmask anonymous users or build profiles of online activity.
Importantly, companies are not legally compelled to comply with administrative subpoenas in the same way they must respond to court orders. This distinction has fueled debate over how tech firms should handle government data requests.
The digital rights organization Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) recently sent a letter to several major technology companies, urging them to push back against requests from the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE. The group argued that companies should demand judicial review before disclosing user information and provide affected individuals with enough notice to challenge such demands themselves.
Speaking about the broader implications, Thomas-Johnson expressed concern over the growing power of both governments and large technology firms. He suggested that the ability to track and access detailed personal data raises urgent questions about privacy, surveillance, and the limits of state authority in the digital age.
