Another New Yorker says officers confronted him after he criticized ICE

Federal Officers Serve Warning to New York Resident Over Email Criticizing ICE

Rochester, N.Y. – A Rochester man was warned by federal authorities after sending an email to the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that the agency deemed threatening. The warning, delivered to his wife, was part of a broader investigation that also saw officers approach a poll worker in Syracuse over a social‑media post about an ICE officer.

The incident began last month, when David Streever, who was on a trip to Finland, returned to the United States and found two federal agents waiting at his home. His lawyer, Adam Steinbaugh of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), told the Associated Press that the officers handed his wife a notice explaining that Streever’s January email to Todd Lyons – the then‑acting director of ICE – had been classified as a threat.

In the email, Streever called Lyons “a monstrous human being” who “will never know peace.” He also warned that the agency’s actions in Minneapolis, where an ICE agent had shot and killed U.S. citizen Renee Nicole Good, would lead to the director’s downfall. Streever added, “Even Trump will turn on you before the end, and you will be a sad, despised man who eats himself alive with shame at your own pathetic weakness.”

Steinbaugh says the language is protected political speech. “A true threat is a serious expression of an intent to commit violence. This email doesn't even come close,” he said. “It’s political speech, it’s an act of petitioning your government.”

Streever was stunned by the visit. “Like many Americans, I was deeply upset after the shootings in Minnesota and I felt compelled to do something,” he said in a statement to the AP. “Writing a letter to the head of ICE seemed like the least I could do to express my sense of outrage. I never dreamed it would lead to a knock on my door by federal officers.”

The same week, federal officers tried to confront Streever again at a New York City hotel after he returned from Finland. Hotel staff turned the officers away, Steinbaugh reported.

The warning to Streever was not an isolated event. Earlier that week, a poll worker in Syracuse, Paigelynne Gonwea, was confronted by federal agents at a voting site during New York’s primaries. Gonwea, who had posted a picture of ICE officer Jonathan Ross – the officer who shot Good – along with the caption, “I think today is a great day for Jonathan to be indicted,” said she believes the warning was a response to that post. Her post, still online, was made after Ross had been identified by the media.

DHS spokesperson Lauren Bis said the agency had investigated Gonwea for posting Ross’s address. “She committed a federal crime by posting the address of an ICE law‑enforcement officer online,” Bis said in a statement last week. “If you doxx our officers, we will investigate you, and you will be brought to justice.”

ICE released a brief statement saying it “investigates all credible threats toward its employees and officers, including threats to the ICE Director.” The agency did not explain why Streever’s email was treated as a threat.

Free‑speech advocates have called the federal response an infringement on constitutional rights. Nathan Freed Wessler, deputy director of the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology project, told the AP that “nobody should be tracked down at their home or hotel room by federal agents in retribution for sending an email merely expressing frustration and opposition to the government’s actions.” He added that the investigation “is an abuse of power and a gross attempt to chill Americans’ constitutionally protected speech.”

The broader context of the incidents is the death of Good, a 41‑year‑old U.S. citizen who was shot by an ICE agent during a “border enforcement” operation in Minneapolis on December 12, 2023. The shooting sparked protests and a nationwide debate over the tactics of U.S. immigration enforcement agencies.

ICE’s acting director, Todd Lyons, had been the target of criticism from many who saw the Minneapolis incident as an example of excessive force. Lyons’s name and position were referenced in both the Streever email and the Gonwea social‑media post, linking the two separate incidents.

While ICE and DHS maintain that their investigations target credible threats, the actions have raised concerns among civil‑liberty groups. FIRE’s Adam Steinbaugh argues that a “political threat” is fundamentally different from a credible threat that poses an immediate danger. “This is a political critique, not a call to violence,” he said.

The Department of Homeland Security’s policy on doxxing – the public posting of an officer’s personal address or other identifying information – has been a point of contention. The agency’s statement that it will investigate “federal crimes” in such cases has been criticized for potentially criminalizing the free exchange of information that many see as protected speech.

In Rochester, Streever has not yet disclosed whether he plans to contest the warning notice. He remains available for interview.

The situation illustrates the delicate balance between law enforcement’s responsibility to protect its personnel and the First Amendment’s guarantee of free expression. Whether federal authorities will pursue further action against Streever or Gonwea remains to be seen. For now, the two incidents continue to spark debate over the limits of government response to dissent.