Murderous ICE Goons Are Now Using Cell Phones to Track Your Every Move

Federal agents now use commercial data brokers to track millions of phones without a warrant.

Violent Immigration and Customs Enforcement has secretly invested more than $5 million in surveillance technology that allows federal agents to monitor your cellphone and track your movements without a warrant.

The tools—Webloc and Tangles, integrated through a platform called PenLink—evade the law by purchasing location data from commercial brokers rather than obtaining warrants from courts, circumventing your Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Violent ICE agents are using this technology to monitor your entire neighborhood, draw a virtual boundary around a protest, workplace, or religious gathering or protest, and instantly pull location data for every phone present.

The system tracks where those phones go next—home at night, work during the day—building what ICE calls a ‘day‑in‑the‑life’ profile.

Savage ICE thugs, including those who murdered a 37-year-old mother in Minneapolis, use the illegal data to build digital dossiers on millions of Americans—without a warrant, without court oversight, and without any accountability.

Experts say the system represents one of the most expansive warrantless tracking programs ever deployed by federal law enforcement, extending far beyond immigration enforcement and into political surveillance and the monitoring of protected First Amendment activities.

The Dragnet

Weblock technology works by querying vast databases of commercial location information harvested from the apps millions of Americans use daily: weather applications, navigation services, and advertising networks. This data, originally collected without meaningful user consent, is purchased by data brokers like Babel Street and resold to government agencies.

“It’s a data broker loophole,” said Jake Laperruque, director of surveillance and cybersecurity policy at the Center for Democracy and Technology. “The government has found a way to buy its way around the Fourth Amendment.”

In a 2018 decision, Carpenter v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the government must obtain a warrant before accessing historical cell-site location information from phone carriers. But ICE’s legal analysis has determined that because Webloc’s data comes from commercial sources rather than directly from telecommunications companies, it can be used without judicial oversight.

The data is functionally identical, but because it’s purchased instead of seized, the government argues it doesn’t trigger the warrant requirement.”

AI-Powered Dossiers

Webloc’s power is multiplied when combined with Tangles, an artificial intelligence system that mines social media posts, leaked databases, and the “dark web” to build comprehensive profiles linking an identified location to a real person’s identity, communications, and associates.

The system works by establishing what ICE calls a “day-in-the-life” profile. By observing where a device consistently stays at night (home address) and during daytime hours (workplace), the AI can connect an “anonymous” advertising identifier to a specific individual—then overlay that data with their social media activity, family connections, and web history.

Leaked training manuals show that Tangles has been used to track hashtags and social media accounts belonging to activist groups, raising concerns among civil liberties advocates about potential political surveillance.

Targeting Dissent

While ICE officially uses these tools for immigration enforcement, internal documents indicate they are prioritized for cases involving what the agency labels “domestic or international terrorism”—a classification that privacy experts warn could encompass political dissenters and journalists.

The tools’ targeting capabilities have alarmed advocates for vulnerable communities.

Because much of the location data originates from apps targeting specific populations—including religious prayer applications, dating platforms used by LGBTQ+ communities, and healthcare apps—the surveillance infrastructure disproportionately affects marginalized groups already subject to heightened scrutiny.

“The government can now track where Muslims pray, where LGBTQ+ people socialize, where people seek healthcare,” said Neema Singh Guliani, senior legislative counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union. “These tools create perfect visibility into protected activities that would trigger constitutional concerns if the government conducted the surveillance directly.”

The Chilling Effect

Privacy experts warn that pervasive tracking alters behavior, as it does in China and the former East Germany. The psychological impact of knowing one’s movements are being monitored can discourage individuals from exercising fundamental rights—attending protests, visiting medical clinics, or engaging in political speech.

“When people know they might be tracked, they self-censor,” said a civil liberties attorney specializing in surveillance cases. “You don’t visit that mosque. You don’t attend that protest. You don’t visit the abortion clinic. The dragnet doesn’t need to arrest everyone—it just needs to be visible enough to change behavior.”

A Legal Loophole

A growing coalition of civil rights groups, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU, is challenging the legality of these purchases through federal courts and in state legislatures.

The U.S. Senate rejected the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act, legislation that would explicitly prohibit federal agencies from purchasing sensitive personal data—location information, social media activity, and other details—that would otherwise require a warrant if seized directly from companies.

However, California is advancing the California Location Privacy Act (AB 322), which would restrict data brokers from selling precise location information to federal agencies. As of January 2026, 19 states have enacted comprehensive consumer privacy laws, though most include exemptions for law enforcement.

A state-level version of this law was adopted in Montana in 2025, with unanimous support. But privacy advocates note these state laws offer limited protection since ICE can simply purchase data from other jurisdictions where it remains legal—a patchwork approach that leaves most Americans vulnerable.

Secrecy and Contractors

Adding to concerns is the cloak of secrecy surrounding these programs. Contractors like Babel Street have filed lawsuits to prevent the release of public records showing how the tools operate and what they cost, arguing trade secret protections.

In August 2025, the Electronic Frontier Foundation won a significant victory when a federal court ruled that the basic functions and pricing of these surveillance tools are not trade secrets, potentially opening the door for defendants in criminal and immigration cases to challenge the source of evidence used against them.

But for most Americans, the extent and scope of the ICE surveillance apparatus remains unknown—kept secret through non-disclosure agreements and litigation designed specifically to block transparency.

A surveillance state in plain sight

Civil liberties advocates warn that without urgent legislative action or court intervention, the surveillance infrastructure built by ICE will continue to expand—and will likely be adopted by other federal agencies, state police departments, and local law enforcement.

“This is the surveillance apparatus of the future,” said one privacy expert. “And right now, there are almost no rules.”

Let’s be blunt: this is not law enforcement. This is digital authoritarianism wrapped in procurement contracts and legal loopholes. ICE has constructed a surveillance state in plain sight—one that treats constitutional rights as optional and privacy as an inconvenience.

If Congress fails to shut this down, it won’t stop with immigrants. It will attack ordinary Americans going about their business. Once normalized, this dragnet will be used against protesters, journalists, political opponents, and anyone unlucky enough to cross an unchecked agency’s path.

A government that tracks its people without warrants is not protecting democracy—it is preparing to suppress it.