President Trump’s executive order, “Eliminating Information Silos,” mandates federal agencies provide designated officials access to all unclassified information, potentially creating a massive citizen database via Palantir. This database, combining data from agencies like the SSA and DHS, raises significant privacy concerns, granting access to sensitive personal information. Despite these concerns, some commentators support the initiative, citing benefits like identifying illegal immigrants, even though this prioritizes security over civil liberties. This action mirrors past instances where fear, such as after 9/11 and during the COVID-19 pandemic, led to the acceptance of expanded government surveillance.
Read More
The USDA, at the behest of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), is demanding states provide extensive personal data on SNAP recipients, including Social Security numbers and addresses. This unprecedented request, stemming from a March executive order, prioritizes data collection over traditional fraud detection methods, raising privacy concerns and the potential for misuse in immigration enforcement. Critics argue this violates the Privacy Act and could lead to deportation and mass surveillance, while the USDA maintains the data will comply with all relevant laws and regulations. The request comes amid proposed SNAP cuts and a history of using such data to make misleading claims about immigration and fraud.
Read More
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has accessed license plate reader data from Westchester County, New York, despite the county’s sanctuary city laws limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities. This data, collected from a network of hundreds of cameras, provides ICE with information on individuals’ movements, potentially undermining sanctuary city protections. The sharing of this data with ICE, and other federal agencies like the FBI and DEA, creates a vast surveillance network across the US, raising concerns about privacy violations and the potential for widespread tracking of individuals. Experts argue this mass surveillance contradicts the spirit of sanctuary city policies and raises serious civil liberty concerns.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker