The fatal shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis by federal immigration agents has reignited internal debate at Google, prompting hundreds of employees to challenge the company’s ties to U.S. immigration enforcement.

In the days following the incident, discussions spread rapidly across Google’s internal communication platforms. On Friday, more than 800 workers signed a collective petition urging company leadership to be more transparent about how its technology is being used by federal agencies. The signatories demanded that Google reconsider and ultimately halt its business relationships with immigration authorities, describing recent enforcement actions as “violent” and resembling “paramilitary raids.”

The petition also raised concerns about workplace safety. Employees cited a reported attempt by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to access Google’s campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and called for clearer protocols to protect staff from potential government intrusion.

The move marks a noticeable resurgence of employee activism at Google and across Silicon Valley, a trend that had largely faded in recent years. While many tech leaders have publicly aligned themselves with the current administration, some workers are now pressing their companies to take a firmer ethical stance and use their influence to shape federal policy.

Although the petition represents only a small fraction of Google’s roughly 190,000 employees, it echoes a period of significant unrest inside the company in 2018. At that time, thousands of workers staged a walkout over Google’s handling of sexual harassment allegations, and later protested its participation in a Pentagon artificial intelligence program related to military drone operations.

Since then, Google’s management has tightened internal controls, restricting access to company documents, reducing open town hall meetings, and taking a harder line against dissent. Two years ago, 28 employees were dismissed after demonstrating against a cloud computing contract with the Israeli government.

As a result, some workers have become more cautious about speaking out. Still, many continue to believe in the spirit of Google’s former informal motto, “Don’t be evil,” even though the phrase has been downplayed in official company culture.

Matthew Tschiegg, a cloud engineer who signed the petition and has worked at Google for over a decade, said that while the motto has been quietly removed from internal materials, its underlying values still resonate with employees.

Meanwhile, Silicon Valley’s leadership has appeared increasingly supportive of President Trump since his return to office. High-profile figures such as Elon Musk of SpaceX and Tesla, Tim Cook of Apple, and Mark Zuckerberg of Meta have all made public gestures of support, including donations and policy collaboration. This has created the impression that the tech industry has shifted politically rightward.

However, the killing of Mr. Pretti exposed divisions within the sector. In the aftermath, Mr. Cook, OpenAI’s Sam Altman, and other executives publicly called on the administration to scale back aggressive immigration tactics.

Google’s chief executive, Sundar Pichai, has not issued a public response. Jeff Dean, chief scientist at Google DeepMind, wrote on social media that the incident should be condemned regardless of political affiliation.

The petition was organized by a group called No Tech for Apartheid, which includes employees from both Google and Amazon. The group has long criticized cloud computing contracts between major tech firms and the Israeli government and military.

The workers referenced a report claiming that Google provides cloud services to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, as well as the company’s partnership with Palantir, a data analytics firm known for developing systems used to track immigrants.

A Google spokesperson responded that the Department of Homeland Security accesses commercially available cloud infrastructure through third-party customers, using standard storage and computing services rather than specialized surveillance tools.

Nevertheless, Mr. Tschiegg said most employees remain in the dark about how Google’s technology is actually deployed in government contracts. The petition calls for a formal question-and-answer session with leadership to clarify the company’s role in immigration enforcement and to outline clear boundaries on government use of artificial intelligence.

For many workers, the issue goes beyond business. They see it as a fundamental moral question about how technology should be used, and who ultimately bears responsibility when it causes harm.

As internal pressure builds, Google faces a difficult balancing act between maintaining lucrative government partnerships and addressing growing ethical concerns from its own workforce.