
ICE uses Facebook data to find and track immigrants - garyfirestorm
https://theintercept.com/2018/03/26/facebook-data-ice-immigration/
======
DrJokepu
Title is misleading. ICE is actually two organizations under a single
umbrella. There’s Enforcmenet and Removal Operations (which is what people
commonly associate with ICE) and there’s Homeland Security Investigations. The
article is about HSI. HSI doesn’t “track immigrants” (that’s the ERO), they
track criminals. Smugglers, people traffickers, etc.

~~~
pharrington
ERO and HSI are different directorates under the same organization. Confusing
two departments of an organization for being two different organizations is
like saying a programming team and QA team of a software development company
are two different organizations.

~~~
DrJokepu
This is basic proposition logic.

A: ICE contains ERO.

B: ICE contains HSI.

C: ERO tracks immigrants.

D: HSI tracks criminals.

E: HSI uses Facebook data.

The statements above simply don’t imply that “ICE uses Facebook data to track
immigrants”. Now as twelveoz pointed it out, a document linked to the article
contains information that would imply that, but that information is not
included in the body of the article. Whether a department counts as an
organization or not is a semantic argument.

------
legostormtroopr
The author makes reference to ICE using these techniques to find "unauthorized
immigrants", which seems to be just another softer term for "illegal
immigrant".

If we want to progress, we need to recognize countries do have different
values and have the right to monitor their borders to limit who can enter
based on those values.

When someone chooses to break the law to cross a border and live anywhere
without notifying the authorities they have to accept the consequences of
that.

~~~
mikeash
Sure, as long as we apply this principle evenly. People who break the speed
limit aren’t “speeders,” they’re “illegal drivers.” Forgot to declare some
Bitcoin to the IRS? You’re not mildly negligent, you’re an “illegal crypto
currency trader”!

Very few people dispute that countries have the right to control their
borders. But that doesn’t mean countries have the right to do whatever they
want in order to do so, any more than a country’s right to punish murderers
means the police can randomly search people’s houses to look for murderers.

~~~
fiblye
>Sure, as long as we apply this principle evenly.

It is applied fairly evenly, despite how many people try to frame it. Online
piracy is often referred to as "illegal downloading/filesharing". People
selling fentanyl aren't referred to as "unauthorized pharmacists" but "illegal
drug dealers." And speeding isn't "illegal driving." When you're speeding,
it's not the act of driving itself that's illegal. It's the speed violation,
which is often referred to as illegally speeding or illegally exceeding the
speed limit. Illegally driving would involve either driving without a license
or driving a stolen vehicle. Illegal immigration involves actively violating
the law in order to gain access or maintain access to another country. The
argument over what term is appropriate is bikeshedding.

~~~
mikeash
"The argument over what term is appropriate is bikeshedding."

Maybe you should take that up with the fellow who started the argument? And I
don't understand why you'd state this after arguing a bunch about the
appropriate term.

Your examples are good, but do you have any that aren't crimes? Entering the
US without authorization is a crime, but staying without authorization is
merely a civil infraction. The majority of "illegal immigrants" fall into the
second category. Driving without a license is a crime, so a more apt analogy
would be parking where it's not allowed. It may sound hyperbolic to compare an
immigration violation to a parking ticket, but that is what the law says. We
don't call people "illegal parkers" when they park where it's not allowed.
Other analogous violations might be trying to take a prohibited item through
airport security ("illegal passengers"?) or violating a building code (a
builder who deliberately and frequently does this might well be referred to as
an "illegal builder").

Interesting side note: in addition to confusing the issue enormously when it
comes to the seemingly straightforward "illegal immigrants are criminals by
definition" argument, the fact that it's only a civil infraction to be in the
country without authorization means that there is no right to a public
defender. People without the means to hire a lawyer or the luck to find one
who will represent them for free get the joyous experience of representing
themselves.

~~~
legostormtroopr
> Driving without a license is a crime, so a more apt analogy would be parking
> where it's not allowed.

Sure, and the similar analogy is "sure he's parked illegally, but you can't
charge him for driving without a licence because parking illegally is a civil
infraction."

Prosecuting illegal migration protects the system. If you want to petition for
easier access to migrate between countries, thats fine. But willfully ignoring
very clear laws and crimes helps no one.

~~~
mikeash
I don’t understand your analogy. Why would the driver be unlicensed in this
scenario?

------
garyfirestorm
I was hoping the arguments here would be about legality of ICE getting access
to (private) Facebook data and how users are unknowingly handing over their
life.

Executing a search warrant on an individual (assuming criminal) is
understandable, but how do you defend - 'the company developed a special
system for ICE to access a vast “ecosystem” of data to facilitate immigration
officials in both discovering targets and then creating and administering
cases against them.'

This sounds like violation of 4th amendment rights. Also, how is this any
different than surveillance?

Further these tools could be used in targeting a particular group(s) of
people. 1\. It appears to be a framework that creates list of people that can
be targeted. 2\. Then they request almost any data to Facebook and Facebook
hands it over promptly 3\. Then they 'administer cases' based on this data.

At this moment, this entire apparatus is targeting 'illegal immigrants'

Since we know the intentions of this administration (see. Executive order on
Muslim ban), it would be very hard to imagine that this apparatus will not be
misused. Remember that immigrants don't get a fair trial. (Old article '09 -
[http://www.nbcnews.com/id/29706177/ns/us_news-
security/t/imm...](http://www.nbcnews.com/id/29706177/ns/us_news-
security/t/immigrants-face-long-detention-few-rights/))

'The report reveals that from January 2017 through June 2017, Facebook
received 32,716 requests for data from 52,280 users. Facebook notes in its
report that it complied with 85 percent of the requests and “approximately 57%
of legal process we received from authorities in the U.S. was accompanied by a
non-disclosure order legally prohibiting us from notifying the affected
users.”'

32k requests for 52k users, sounds like a bulk data request potentially being
served to Facebook. This is in line with the FISA fiasco that happened few
years ago.

Facebook is unfortunately complicit in creation of any 'lists' (I do realize
that Facebook is in itself a list)

Overall, the rhetoric (in this case anti-immigrant) coupled with unfettered
access to Facebook data and palantir data analytics are digital weapons that
can be/are used to target large swaths of people.

People were afraid of 'knock down the door style mass deportations',
apparently all they have to do is ask Facebook for help.

