“It’s no longer Officer Friendly out there,” Whitlock says. “This is not to give any excuse, but I can imagine there is a mindset within the field ICE agents and CBP where they really do think they’re under attack and being threatened. And no one is above the law, but I think it’s important for people to understand that there are going to be limited forms of trying to hold these officers accountable in practice.”

On the Scene

If you find yourself witnessing an immigration enforcement action, there are some things to keep in mind if you want to stick around.

“The goal is to be an observer and to document what is happening,” says Nathan-Pineau of the Immigrant Legal Resource Center. “The goal is not to go and try to intervene in the law enforcement action.”

Training materials from Siembra NC, a North Carolina–based grassroots organization working to defend its local communities from exploitation, say that the priority when ICE is present is letting agents know they are being observed and reminding people of their right to remain silent, while deescalating whenever possible and promoting safety. The group advises that if ICE operatives are conducting an arrest or traffic stop, responders should try to approach within their line of sight and identify themselves in the process.

Filming ICE behavior can let agents know they are being watched, potentially creating some accountability for their actions, as well as a digital evidence trail for any legal cases or proceedings that may occur at a later date. When interacting with federal agents as part of a group effort responding to ICE, Siembra NC recommends identifying yourself as a volunteer, and asking agents who they are, what they are doing, and what agency they work for. Then you can state that you will remain present to observe, while also recording any models of vehicles, license plates, and operatives at the scene.

“We always advise people that if the law enforcement officer that you are filming tells you to step back, you should step back and you should say it out loud—‘I’m stepping back, I’m stepping back.’ That way you’re recording that you’re complying with their order,” Nathan-Pineau says.

Multiple sources reiterated that recording federal agents has a dual purpose, because if your own behavior and that of the people around you is appropriate to the situation, this will be captured in your documentation as well as any officer misconduct. The fact remains, though, that peacefully filming interactions can be interpreted as aggressive or escalatory precisely because it is an accountability mechanism.

Proximity is one of the most important risks to assess when on the scene, says Xavier de Janon, director of mass self-defense at the National Lawyers Guild. “The closer people have been to federal agents or property, the more likely they’ve been charged, tackled, or arrested,” he says.

More and more, federal prosecutors are seeking criminal charges against people for allegedly assaulting federal officers, even if the cases ultimately don’t succeed and later get dropped. The NLG recently published a guide on how protesters and observers can assess risks related to the federal assault law.

Work From Home

Even if you can’t risk hitting the streets, there are other important ways to contribute to community safety efforts.

Civil liberties groups have been campaigning nationwide to ban real-time surveillance platforms and end lucrative contracts that feed information to ICE. You can contact the offices of your local officials and tell them to cancel surveillance contracts and stop information-sharing and other law enforcement cooperation that fuels ICE operations.

As self-driving car services from Alphabet’s Waymo, Amazon’s Zoox, and Tesla have slowly, quietly expanded across the US, one big, important state has mostly stayed mum: New York.

The union’s fourth most populous state has some of the tightest laws governing autonomous vehicles, requiring companies approved to test in the state to only do so with a driver behind the wheel. There’s no current path for companies to operate the sort of commercial robotaxi services like the sort seen in San Francisco or Las Vegas.

But that could be about to change. On Tuesday, as part of her annual State of State address, Governor Kathy Hochul is set to announce that she is proposing legislation that would expand New York’s current regulations to allow companies to operate limited commercial self-driving car services in cities around the state, her office confirmed Monday. Pilot robotaxi programs would be approved only if the companies submit applications that “demonstrate local support” for their tech’s deployment, as well as robust safety records. The program would exclude New York City.

“This program will make our roads safer and will improve mobility options for communities outside of New York City,” Governor Hochul said in a statement. She said that state agencies would “ensure that these pilots are done in accordance with the highest safety standards.”

If it passes, the legislation would leave one thing unclear: how self-driving-tech developers might jump from providing limited services in New York cities to operating full-scale commercial operations, like the sort Waymo runs in the San Francisco Bay Area. More information about how commercial robotaxi services might fully launch in the state would come “in the future,” Hochul’s office said.

New York City—the nation’s largest metropolis—operates its own autonomous vehicle testing permit program but doesn’t have a path to allow the vehicles to operate without drivers on its busy streets. Waymo holds a permit to test eight vehicles in parts of Manhattan and Brooklyn; that permit will expire at the end of March. The eight vehicles are also not allowed to operate without a safety driver behind the wheel, or to pick up passengers.

If it passes, Hochul’s legislation would mark a serious win for self-driving-car developers, who have viewed large, urbanized states including Illinois, Massachusetts, Washington, and New York as the juiciest targets for legislation allowing the operation of commercial robotaxi services. Other states, including California, Texas, and Arizona, have laws on the books clearly outlining how the technology companies might move from testing to limited pilot programs and then full-blown commercial services.

State records show that Waymo spent more than $370,000 lobbying New York State officials and lawmakers on transportation and telecommunications issues last year. The company currently operates driverless services in five cities—Phoenix, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Austin, and Atlanta—and plans to launch services in some dozen more, including London, this year.

The State of Minnesota and the cites of Minneapolis and St. Paul on Monday filed a sweeping federal lawsuit to halt what they call an unprecedented and unlawful surge of US federal agents in the Twin Cities, arguing the deployment amounts to a constitutional violation and a direct threat to public safety.

The 80-page complaint, filed in US district court in Minnesota, targets the US Department of Homeland Security and senior federal officials, including DHS secretary Kristi Noem. It asks a judge to immediately block what the federal government calls “Operation Metro Surge,” a large-scale immigration operation that plaintiffs say has sent thousands of armed, masked federal agents into Minnesota communities far from the border, overwhelming local infrastructure and law enforcement.

At a press conference Monday afternoon, Minnesota attorney general Keith Ellison said the lawsuit is intended to stop what he described as an unlawful federal escalation. “This is, in essence, a federal invasion of the Twin Cities and Minnesota, and it must stop.” He accused DHS agents of sowing “chaos and terror” across the metro area through warrantless arrests, excessive force, and enforcement actions at schools, churches, hospitals, and other sensitive locations.

Ellison said the surge has forced school closures and lockdowns, hurt local businesses, and diverted police resources away from routine public safety work. He cited more than 20 ICE-related incidents, including reports of people being pulled into unmarked vehicles by masked agents and vehicles left abandoned in the streets, calling it an “unlawful commandeering of police resources.”

The lawsuit also points to the recent fatal shooting of Minneapolis resident Renee Nicole Good by an ICE agent as a turning point that intensified fear and unrest. Ellison said that the killing, along with subsequent federal rhetoric, left families and entire communities feeling unsafe in public spaces.

Good, 37, was a wife and mother of three. She was fatally shot by an ICE officer during a Minneapolis enforcement operation on January 7. The FBI has assumed sole jurisdiction over the investigation, effectively barring Minnesota authorities from accessing evidence or taking part in the probe, a move state officials say undermines transparency and the integrity of law enforcement in the public eye.

Plaintiffs argue the federal operation violates the Tenth Amendment, federal administrative law, and long-standing limits on immigration enforcement. They also accuse the Trump administration of “retaliatory conduct based on Minnesota’s lawful exercise of its sovereign authority.”

Asked by a reporter from PBS Frontline who said his crew had been pepper-sprayed by federal agents earlier in the day whether the litigation sought to curb the use of crowd-control weapons, Ellison urged journalists to file complaints. “Part of what our case is about is First Amendment protection,” he said. “The press is protected by the First Amendment, and it’s vitally important in this moment.”

In a separate lawsuit Monday, the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago sued DHS and senior federal officials, accusing the Trump administration of unleashing a militarized immigration operation that has “rampaged for months through Chicago and surrounding areas, lawlessly stopping, interrogating, and arresting residents, and attacking them with chemical weapons.”