Google Sent Personal and Financial Information of Student Journalist to ICE

Google provided U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement with extensive personal information about a student journalist in response to a subpoena that lacked judicial approval, according to a report by The Intercept.

The technology giant shared usernames, residential addresses, and a detailed list of services connected to the Google account of Amandla Thomas-Johnson, a British student and journalist who briefly attended a pro-Palestinian protest in 2024 while studying at Cornell University.

In addition to basic account details, Google also disclosed Thomas-Johnson's IP addresses, phone numbers, subscriber identifiers, and information tied to his financial accounts, including credit card and bank account numbers associated with his Google profile.

The subpoena reportedly included a gag order and did not provide a clear justification for ICE's request for Thomas-Johnson's personal data. The student has previously stated that the request for his information occurred within roughly two hours of Cornell notifying him that the U.S. government had revoked his student visa.

The incident highlights a growing and controversial practice in which U.S. authorities rely on administrative subpoenas to obtain user data from technology companies. These subpoenas are issued directly by federal agencies—without review or approval from a judge—and have increasingly been used in cases involving individuals critical of the Trump administration.

According to reporting, similar legal demands have targeted anonymous Instagram accounts that share information about ICE activity and raids, as well as individuals who publicly criticise or protest former President Donald Trump and his policies.

Neither Google nor U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement responded to requests for comment at the time of publication.

Administrative subpoenas differ significantly from court-issued warrants or orders. While they cannot compel companies to hand over the contents of emails, search histories, or precise location data, they can still be used to request metadata and identifying details—such as email addresses, IP logs, and account information—often to identify the person behind an online account.

Importantly, companies are not legally required to comply with administrative subpoenas as they must with court orders. Compliance is discretionary, leaving technology firms with the option to challenge or refuse such requests.

Last week, the digital rights advocacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation sent a formal letter to Amazon, Apple, Discord, Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Reddit. The organisation urged companies to stop providing user data to the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, when requests are made under administrative subpoenas.

"Based on our own contact with targeted users, we are deeply concerned your companies are failing to challenge unlawful surveillance and defend user privacy and speech," the letter stated.

The EFF further called on companies receiving such subpoenas to require DHS to obtain court approval before any user information is disclosed. The group also urged firms to notify affected users promptly, giving them a meaningful opportunity to contest the subpoenas independently.

Reflecting on the situation, Thomas-Johnson told The Intercept that the case raises urgent questions about resistance and accountability in an era of pervasive data collection. "We need to think very hard about what resistance looks like under these conditions," he said, "where government and Big Tech know so much about us, can track us, can imprison, can destroy us in a variety of ways."

The case adds to an intensifying debate over privacy, surveillance, and the role of technology companies when confronted with government demands for user data.