It’s OK to tell ICE their actions will haunt them, judge rules in speech fight

法官裁定：告诉美国移民及海关执法局（ICE）他们的行为将令其寝食难安，这并不违法

It’s not illegal to send an email telling Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials that their actions will haunt them, a federal judge ruled Tuesday, granting a preliminary injunction that blocks ICE from threatening to prosecute a critic for protected speech. 周二，一位联邦法官作出裁定，向美国移民及海关执法局（ICE）官员发送电子邮件，称他们的行为将令其寝食难安，这并不违法。法官发布了一项初步禁令，阻止ICE威胁起诉一位因受保护言论而受到批评的公民。

Back in January, David Streever sent a scathing three-paragraph email to then-acting director of ICE, Todd Lyons. Outraged by the killings of two Minnesota protestors against ICE, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, Streever told Lyons that he was a “monstrous human being” who will eat himself “alive with shame” for defending officers who shot people who posed no threat and had no weapons. 今年1月，大卫·斯特里弗（David Streever）向时任ICE代理局长的托德·里昂（Todd Lyons）发送了一封措辞严厉的三段式电子邮件。斯特里弗对明尼苏达州两名反ICE抗议者——蕾妮·古德（Renee Good）和亚历克斯·普雷蒂（Alex Pretti）——被杀感到愤怒，他在邮件中称里昂是一个“怪物般的人”，并表示他将因捍卫那些射杀手无寸铁且未构成威胁之人的警员而“在羞愧中活活吞噬自己”。

Comparing Lyons to an infamous high-ranking Nazi cop, Streever predicted that “even Trump” would one day turn on Lyons for defending the “obvious” slayings of Americans. 斯特里弗将里昂比作臭名昭著的纳粹高官，并预言“即使是特朗普”有一天也会因为里昂为这些“显而易见”的杀害美国人行为辩护而与其反目。

“You are a monstrous human being and will go down in history as America’s Reinhard Heydrich, the butcher,” Streever wrote. “You will never know peace. You will seek to lose yourself, to escape the burden of knowing the truth about yourself. But wherever you go, you will find yourself. You will torment yourself until your last day on Earth.” “你是一个怪物，将作为美国的‘屠夫’莱因哈德·海德里希（Reinhard Heydrich）载入史册，”斯特里弗写道。“你永远不会获得安宁。你会试图迷失自我，逃避了解真相带来的负担。但无论你走到哪里，你都会面对自己。你将折磨自己，直到你在地球上的最后一天。”

ICE did nothing when the email was received, but five months later, the agency served a warning notice at Streever’s home that claimed his note may have constituted a criminal threat of violence. Those warnings are normally issued to people threatening to assault, kidnap, or murder officials, not morally condemn their actions. ICE在收到邮件时并未采取行动，但五个月后，该机构向斯特里弗家中送达了一份警告通知，声称他的邮件可能构成了刑事暴力威胁。此类警告通常针对那些威胁要袭击、绑架或谋杀官员的人，而非针对那些在道德上谴责其行为的人。

But ICE held Streever’s email to the same bar, warning that if he did not “discontinue” speaking critically of ICE leadership, he risked state and federal prosecution. Because Streever wasn’t there at the time of their visit, agents took the extra step of tracking him down at a hotel. That “greatly alarmed” him, his lawyers at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) said in a press release. And he’s been self-censoring ever since, fearful of government retaliation. 然而，ICE却以同样的标准对待斯特里弗的邮件，警告称如果他不“停止”对ICE领导层的批评言论，他将面临州和联邦的起诉。由于斯特里弗在探访时不在家，特工们甚至采取了进一步行动，在一家酒店找到了他。他的律师——个人权利与表达基金会（FIRE）在新闻稿中表示，这让他感到“非常惊恐”。自那以后，由于担心政府的报复，他一直进行自我审查。

“I’m deeply relieved” “我深感宽慰”

At least for now, ICE apparently has conceded that Streever’s email was protected speech, US District Judge Rudolph Contreras wrote in his opinion. Notably, ICE confirmed that the agency supposedly dropped the investigation within a month of sending the warning, but it never told Streever that his case was closed. 美国地方法官鲁道夫·孔特雷拉斯（Rudolph Contreras）在裁决意见书中写道，至少目前看来，ICE已经承认斯特里弗的邮件属于受保护的言论。值得注意的是，ICE证实该机构在发出警告后一个月内就撤销了调查，但从未告知斯特里弗案件已结。

Rather, an official Department of Homeland Security (DHS) account made a “somewhat contradictory statement” in an X post that Streever reasonably understood as confirming that the probe was still underway, Contreras said. Moving forward, ICE still has to prove that the case was actually closed. 孔特雷拉斯表示，相反，美国国土安全部（DHS）的一个官方账号在X（原推特）上发布了一份“有些矛盾的声明”，斯特里弗有理由将其理解为调查仍在进行中。展望未来，ICE仍需证明该案件确实已经结案。

Either way, though, the agency’s warning—which Contreras said “practically shouts” that Streever could be prosecuted for future political speech—remained in effect. That allowed the government to continue censoring Streever in likely violation of his First Amendment rights, Contreras wrote. 不过，无论如何，该机构的警告——孔特雷拉斯称其“几乎在大声疾呼”斯特里弗可能因未来的政治言论而被起诉——仍然有效。孔特雷拉斯写道，这使得政府能够继续审查斯特里弗，这很可能违反了他的第一修正案权利。

To avoid irreparable harm to Streever, Contreras ordered ICE to temporarily stop enforcing the warning notice, making good on the threats, or issuing similar threats while the case proceeds. Otherwise, Contreras found that Streever “faces a distinct possibility of prosecution for future speech,” especially since a DHS spokesperson has warned that “ANYONE who assaults or threatens our law enforcement officers will face the consequences.” 为了避免对斯特里弗造成不可挽回的伤害，孔特雷拉斯下令ICE在案件审理期间暂时停止执行该警告通知，停止实施威胁，或发布类似的威胁。否则，孔特雷拉斯认为，斯特里弗“面临着因未来言论而被起诉的明确可能性”，特别是考虑到国土安全部的一位发言人曾警告称，“任何袭击或威胁我们执法人员的人都将面临后果。”

“I’m deeply relieved that the court affirmed what I knew all along: that I am permitted to speak my conscience in the United States of America, including when I criticize government officials,” Streever said. “While I wish this ordeal hadn’t happened, hopefully this incident will serve as a reminder that the First Amendment protects us all.” “我深感宽慰，法院肯定了我一直以来所知道的事实：在美国，我有权表达我的良知，包括批评政府官员，”斯特里弗说。“虽然我希望这场磨难从未发生，但希望这一事件能提醒大家，第一修正案保护着我们所有人。”

ICE doesn’t contest email is protected speech ICE不否认邮件属于受保护言论

Ars could not immediately reach ICE for comment or to confirm if it plans to appeal the injunction. During litigation, ICE wouldn’t explain who made the determination that Streever was potentially illegally threatening violence. Instead, ICE noted that the email came amid a reported “946 percent increase in threats against ICE officials” between 2024 and 2025. Ultimately, it was decided that “the email had potential threatening undertones to ICE personnel, potentially presenting a safety concern,” ICE claimed. Ars无法立即联系到ICE置评，也无法确认其是否计划对该禁令提出上诉。在诉讼过程中，ICE拒绝解释是谁认定斯特里弗可能构成了非法暴力威胁。相反，ICE指出，这封邮件是在2024年至2025年间针对ICE官员的威胁“增加了946%”的背景下发出的。ICE声称，最终决定认为“该邮件对ICE人员具有潜在的威胁意味，可能构成安全隐患”。

As the case moves forward, ICE will likely continue to argue that it needs to police critical emails like Streever’s “to protect the ability of law enforcement to investigate and deter criminal threats or crimes that follow less-than-criminal threats.” However, Contreras emphasized that ICE’s lawyers “wisely do not contest that Mr. Streever’s January email constitutes protected expression or that similar speech would be protected.” 随着案件的推进，ICE可能会继续辩称，它需要监管像斯特里弗这样的批评性邮件，“以保护执法部门调查和威慑刑事威胁，或威慑那些在非刑事威胁之后发生的犯罪行为的能力”。然而，孔特雷拉斯强调，ICE的律师“明智地没有否认斯特里弗先生1月份的邮件构成受保护的表达，也没有否认类似的言论会受到保护”。

As Contreras explained: Streever’s email addressed salient political decisions to a government official, an arena where the First Amendment’s speech protections reach their “zenith.” More importantly, the email does not contain a physical threat. The email registered displeasure with Acting Director Lyons’s official conduct, forecasted that the Acting Director will lose favor with the President, and warned that the moral weight of the Acting Director’s actions will haunt him in the future. 正如孔特雷拉斯所解释的那样：斯特里弗的邮件是针对政府官员的重要政治决策，这是第一修正案言论保护达到“顶峰”的领域。更重要的是，这封邮件不包含人身威胁。邮件表达了对代理局长里昂公务行为的不满，预言代理局长将失去总统的青睐，并警告称其行为的道德负担将在未来令他寝食难安。

Although Mr. Streever’s email was not kind, and may not have been particularly productive, it was a far cry from a “[t]rue threat[ ] of violence” sufficient for the email to shed its First Amendment protections. As it stands, the agency must defend against both First Amendment coercion and retaliation claims. 虽然斯特里弗先生的邮件并不友善，也未必特别有建设性，但它远非足以剥夺其第一修正案保护的“真正的暴力威胁”。目前，该机构必须同时应对第一修正案下的胁迫和报复指控。

ICE critic likely to win ICE批评者胜算较大

Contreras found that Streever is likely “to succeed in proving that Defendants either tried to coerce him into abandoning his First Amendment rights or retaliated against him for his exercise of those rights.” Until that’s decided, the… 孔特雷拉斯认为，斯特里弗很可能“成功证明被告要么试图胁迫他放弃第一修正案权利，要么因他行使这些权利而对他进行报复”。在裁决做出之前，……