On the morning of January 10, longtime Richfield, Minnesota resident Nicole Cleland found herself in an unexpected confrontation while driving through her neighborhood. She was following an Immigration and Customs Enforcement vehicle as part of her volunteer work with a local civic group that monitors immigration enforcement activity.

As she trailed the white Dodge Ram through a network of one-way streets, the ICE agent abruptly pulled over. The officer stepped out of his truck, approached Cleland’s car, and addressed her by name — even though they had never met before.

Cleland, 56, later recalled that the agent told her he was using facial recognition technology and that his body camera was recording. The encounter left her unsettled.

According to community activists and social media footage reviewed by independent journalists, Cleland was among at least seven U.S. citizens in the Minneapolis area this month who were informed by ICE officers that their faces were being scanned and recorded using biometric software. None of them had given permission for such data collection.

The incident occurred amid a large-scale immigration enforcement operation in Minnesota, where thousands of ICE agents have been deployed. While the agency says its focus is identifying undocumented immigrants, former and current officials from the Department of Homeland Security indicated that surveillance tools are also being used to monitor American citizens — particularly those who have publicly protested ICE activities.

Multiple advanced technologies are reportedly in use. These include two facial recognition systems: one developed by Clearview AI and another called Mobile Fortify. In addition, ICE is said to be employing tools that can track cellphone activity, scrape social media data, and even access mobile devices remotely under certain circumstances.

Agents are also relying on a massive data platform built by Palantir, which combines government records with commercial databases to pinpoint individuals’ real-time locations. Critics argue that the integration of these tools gives federal authorities unprecedented surveillance power.

Civil liberties advocates have expressed growing alarm. Nathan Freed Wessler, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, said that while law enforcement has long used technology, the scale and intensity of ICE’s current approach mark a significant escalation.

The Department of Homeland Security has declined to specify exactly which tools are being used in Minnesota. A spokesperson stated that the agency routinely employs modern technology in its operations and that ICE is no different from other law enforcement bodies in this regard.

Lawmakers have also raised concerns. In November, several Democratic senators formally requested more transparency about ICE’s use of facial recognition and urged the agency to suspend its deployment in U.S. cities until clearer legal and ethical guidelines are established.

ICE’s technological expansion has coincided with a dramatic increase in funding. After a major budget boost approved last summer, the agency’s annual allocation jumped from about eight billion dollars to nearly twenty-eight billion, making it one of the best-funded federal law enforcement agencies.

Earlier in 2024, Homeland Security awarded Palantir a multi-million-dollar contract to develop an artificial intelligence system aimed at tracking individuals targeted for deportation. According to officials, the system is already being used in pilot form.

The agency has also invested heavily in social media monitoring tools. One of these, developed by Israeli firm Paragon, allows operators to remotely access phones, read messages, and track locations. Other software built by Penlink collects online data from public platforms and data brokers to compile detailed digital profiles of individuals.

Video footage from Minnesota this month shows agents using smartphones to scan the faces of protesters in Minneapolis. In one recording, officers can be heard explicitly telling bystanders that their images were being captured and stored in a government database.

A Homeland Security spokesperson described Mobile Fortify as a lawful enforcement tool that is used nationwide within existing legal frameworks.

Meanwhile, ICE has signaled interest in acquiring even more data-driven capabilities. The agency recently issued a request for proposals seeking ways to integrate large-scale commercial data and advertising technology into its operations, including tools that could help identify individuals through names, phone numbers, devices, or locations.

Privacy experts warn that this direction could further blur the line between immigration enforcement and mass surveillance of ordinary Americans.

For Cleland, the personal consequences were immediate. Three days after her encounter with the ICE agent, she received an email from the Department of Homeland Security informing her that her Global Entry and TSA travel privileges had been revoked, with no explanation provided.

She described feeling torn between anger and fear, uncertain about how far ICE’s authority might extend and worried about the risks of continuing her activism.

Last week, Cleland joined a federal lawsuit in Minnesota challenging ICE’s treatment of civilian observers. In her formal declaration to the court, she questioned why her travel status had been withdrawn despite having committed no wrongdoing.

She concluded that she considers herself an ordinary American citizen who simply cannot remain silent about what she sees happening around her.