Updated Lawyers at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) are helping three US labor unions sue the Trump administration over a social media surveillance program that threatens to punish those who publicly express views that are not harmonious with the government’s position.

Citing First Amendment violations, the case is attempting to convince a federal court to end the program, which the EFF said has “silenced and frightened both citizens and noncitizens,” and impacted the unions’ ability to engage with members.

The program primarily targets individuals legally residing in the US, meaning they are entitled to constitutional protections, but do not have citizenship.

Nearly all US visa applicants are required to hand over all of the social media handles they have used in the past five years, per a policy update that came into effect under the Trump administration, but was proposed as early as the Obama administration.

Noncitizens on F, M, and J visas, which pertain to academic, nonacademic, vocational study and educational exchange programs, are also required to make their social media accounts publicly viewable.

A combined effort between the Department of Homeland Security, the State Department, and the Department of Justice, called “Catch and Revoke,” is using AI to monitor these visa holders’ social media accounts for support of Hamas, Palestine, or antisemitism.

As the name suggests, any individual that expresses non-conforming or what has been described as anti-American views could be stripped of their visas and/or immigration benefits.

On September 30, in a case brought against state secretary Marco Rubio by the American Association of University Professors, a federal court in Massachusetts ruled [PDF] that Trump’s executive orders introducing these surveillance measures were unconstitutional.

The government is likely to appeal against the decision, but for now, immigration enforcement officers cannot deport or revoke visas based on protected speech alone.

The Center for Democracy and Technology said: “Developments such as the AAUP decision and [Jimmy Kimmel’s reinstatement by ABC] show that the Administration’s attempts to suppress speech can be overcome so long as people and key institutions are willing to stand up, reject attempts to recharacterize dissent as terrorism or other unprotected activity, and reclaim free speech as a right for all, not just the favored few.”

Other countries, including the UK, also engage in social media monitoring for the purposes of countering extremism or preserving national security. However, it generally only does this when there are known concerns about a given individual, rather than deploying a blanket screening of all immigrants.

The EFF said previously that although Trump’s executive orders are designed to target student visa holders, because these individuals’ networks likely include fellow students that are US citizens, the surveillance likely infringes their free speech rights also.

“Since taking power, the Trump administration has created a mass surveillance program to monitor constitutionally protected speech by noncitizens lawfully present in the US,” the EFF said.

“Using AI and other automated technologies, the program surveils the social media accounts of visa holders with the goal of identifying and punishing those who express viewpoints the government doesn’t like.

“This has been paired with a public intimidation campaign, silencing not just noncitizens with immigration status, but also the families, coworkers, and friends with whom their lives are integrated.”

The case, supported by the EFF, Muslim Advocates, and the Media Freedom & Information Access Clinic, was filed on Thursday and includes accounts of how union members adjusted to the program.

The United Automobile Workers (UAW), Communications Workers of America (CWA), and American Federation of Teachers (AFT) said they are experiencing difficulty engaging with their members as a result of the program.

The complaint [PDF] argues that the majority of union members have altered their online activity as a result, deleting posts and entire accounts out of fear they could be used to revoke their visas.

The EFF said that more than 60 percent of UAW noncitizen members and more than 30 percent of CWA noncitizen members had wiped their social media accounts to some degree, or refrained from sharing union content.

The figures rose to more than 80 percent and 40 percent respectively for those aware of the surveillance program, according to the campaigner’s survey.

“Many members also reported altering their offline union activity in response to the program, including avoiding being publicly identified as part of the unions and reducing their participation in rallies and protests,” it said.

“One member even said they declined to report a wage theft claim due to fears arising from the surveillance program.”

The State Department highlighted earlier this week that its social media vetting of visa applicants also covers sentiments against Charlie Kirk.

It shared six examples of individuals expressing negative sentiments toward the assassinated right-wing influencer on social media, saying “the United States has no obligation to host foreigners who wish death on Americans.”

“Aliens who take advantage of America’s hospitality while celebrating the assassination of our citizens will be removed.”

The Register contacted the department for a response to the lawsuit. ®

Updated to add at 1553 UTC, October 17

State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson Tommy Pigott told The Register: “The United States is under no obligation to allow foreign aliens to come to our country, commit acts of anti-American, pro-terrorist, and antisemitic hate, or incite violence. We will continue to revoke the visas of those who put the safety of our citizens at risk.”