Latest news with #AMO
WIRED
13-06-2025
- Politics
- WIRED
The High-Flying Escalation of CBP's Predator Drone Flights Over LA
Jun 13, 2025 11:48 AM Custom and Border Protection flying powerful Predator B drones over Los Angeles further breaks the seal on federal involvement in civilian matters typically handled by state or local authorities. An MQ-9 Reaper drone with Customs and Border Protection awaits the next mission over the US-Mexico border on November 4, 2022, at Fort Huachuca, Arizona. Photograph:On Wednesday, United States Customs and Border Protection confirmed to 404 Media that it has been flying Predator drones over Los Angeles amid the LA protests. The military drones, a CBP statement said, 'are supporting our federal law enforcement partners in the Greater Los Angeles area, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement, with aerial support of their operations.' State-level law enforcement agencies across the US use various types of drones and other vehicles, like helicopters, to conduct aerial surveillance, and other agencies use drones in their operations as well. For example, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 'doubled its use of drones' this year, according to the office of Governor Gavin Newsom, as part of efforts to combat forest fires. However, CBP's MQ-9 Reaper drones, also known as Predator B drones, are military-caliber UAVs used for aerial reconnaissance that can be armed. In 2020, during President Donald Trump's first administration, CBP flew a Predator drone over Minneapolis during the George Floyd protests. And, in the intervening years, researchers have tracked Department of Homeland Security Predator drones flying over various US cities with no clear explanation. In the case of LA, Trump has deployed more than 700 active-duty Marines and federalized the National Guard, sending nearly 4,000 guardsmen to California over Newsom's objections. In combination with these actions, the presence of the CBP drones paints a picture of expanding federal involvement—and potentially control—over what are typically state matters. 'Military gear has been used for domestic law enforcement for a long time, but flying military gear over LA at a time when the president has sent military units against the wishes of the governor is noteworthy," says Matthew Feeney, a longtime emerging technologies researcher and advocacy manager at the nonpartisan UK civil liberties group Big Brother Watch. 'If the federal government portrays immigration as a national security issue, we shouldn't be surprised if it openly uses the tools of national security—i.e., military hardware—in response.' Carrying powerful cameras and other sensors, Predator drones can record clear, detailed footage of events like protests from high altitudes. CBP's 'Air and Marine Operations (AMO) is providing aerial support to federal law enforcement partners conducting operations in the Greater Los Angeles area,' CBP told WIRED in a statement responding to questions about whether the operation over LA is routine or anomalous. 'AMO's efforts are focused on situational awareness and officer safety support as requested.' Patrick Eddington, a senior fellow in homeland security and civil liberties at the Cato Institute, warns that 'the more the protests spread to other cities, the more of that kind of surveillance we'll see.' CBP told 404 Media this week that 'AMO is not engaged in the surveillance of first amendment activities.' That statement aligns with a commitment the US Department of Homeland Security made in December 2015. 'Unmanned aircraft system-recorded data should not be collected, disseminated or retained solely for the purpose of monitoring activities protected by the US Constitution, such as the First Amendment's protections of religion, speech, press, assembly, and redress of grievances (e.g., protests, demonstrations),' a DHS 'Privacy, Civil Rights & Civil Liberties Unmanned Aircraft Systems Working Group' wrote at the time. In practice, though, it is unclear how the Predator surveillance could 'support' ICE agents and other federal law enforcement without monitoring the protests and capturing images of protesters. While researchers note that the use of Predator drones over LA is not unprecedented—and, at this point, perhaps not surprising—they emphasize that this pattern of activity over time only makes it more likely that the federal government will deploy such monitoring in the future, regardless of how a state is handling a situation. 'It's not new or even all that unexpected from a spooked Trump administration, but it's still a terrible use of military technology on civilian populations,' says UAV researcher Faine Greenwood. 'It's basically continuing a worrying trend, but also people should be angry about it and refuse to normalize it.'
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
DHS Using Drones Capable of Surveillance Amid L.A. Protests
Police arrest dozens of protesters during a protest over immigration raids near the City Hall in Los Angeles, California, on June 11, 2025. Credit - Tayfun Coskun—Anadolu via Getty The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is using drones during the protests in Los Angeles, the department has confirmed, further fueling controversy surrounding the escalating law enforcement response to the demonstrations that broke out as immigration raids occurred throughout the city. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP), an agency within DHS, confirmed on Thursday that it is providing 'aerial support' to law enforcement. "Air and Marine Operations (AMO) is providing aerial support to federal law enforcement partners conducting operations in the Greater Los Angeles area. AMO's efforts are focused on situational awareness and officer safety support as requested,' a CBP spokesperson told TIME via email. DHS shared footage of the protests shot with a drone on social media earlier in the week. 'WATCH: DHS drone footage of LA rioters,' the department wrote via an X post on June 10, which included video of cars burning and an apparent explosion accompanied by sinister music. 'California politicians must call off their rioting mob.' The protests in Los Angeles have been predominantly peaceful as they enter their seventh day, media on the ground has reported, though some have escalated as cars have been set on fire and projectiles have been thrown. Despite that, President Donald Trump has deployed thousands of National Guard members and is mobilizing hundreds of Marines to the area, against the wishes of state and local leaders. Local law enforcement has also used crowd control tactics such as rubber bullets and tear gas, and Mayor Karen Bass has declared a state of 'local emergency' and imposed an ongoing 8 p.m. to 6 p.m. curfew. Read More: Veterans Condemn Trump's 'Misuse of Military Power' Amid L.A. Protests Since the protests began on Friday, more than 160 people have been arrested by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). The majority of those arrests, according to the New York Times, occurred on Monday, and a majority of them were based on failure to disperse charges. CBP confirmed to 404 media that the drones used by the agency were two Predator drones after the media company reported that drones were spotted flying without call signs where the anti-ICE protests were occurring. Department of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth addressed reports of the drones in a June 11 hearing with Congress. Rhode Island Senator Jack Reed asked Hegseth if he was prepared for DHS to use drones to 'to detain or arrest American citizens.' 'Every authorization we've provided the National Guard and the Marines in Los Angeles is under the authority of the President of the United States,' Hegseth answered. According to Alejandra Montoya-Boyer, senior director of the Center for Civil Rights & Technology at the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, tech groups and civil rights groups alike are "surprised and deeply concerned' by the use of drones, but it is not "necessarily new.' 'CBP has a pretty expansive opportunity to be able to deploy drone technology and other technologies that are able to surveil and track anyone, whether they're crossing the border or in these spaces,' Montoya-Boyer tells TIME. She says 'this isn't necessarily the first time we're seeing this,' but noted that it could still be harmful and 'disproportionately impacting communities of color and immigrants right now.' She says people are often unaware of the extent of land that CBP has access to—100 air miles from any external boundary of the U.S, a border zone that almost two-thirds of the U.S. population lives within. Montoya-Boyer says that the technology used by these drones was created to track border crossings, not to be used to track U.S. citizens at protests. 'The reality is, with the development of these types of technologies, and with appropriations by CBP and DHS, they can be used for domestic surveillance and as needed by an administration that isn't necessarily doing what's usual,' she says. Though the CBP has stated that the drones are focused on 'situational awareness' and 'officer safety,' Montoyta-Boyers says there 'is no reason for us to believe that it is just in the name of law and order' as 'there is an increase, an expansion of surveillance technologies in the name of immigration enforcement being deployed all across the country on the majority of people, whether they're immigrants or not She recommends those who decide to lawfully and peacefully protest to access both the ACLU's and Electronic Frontier Foundation's guides to what protestors' rights are. This is not the first time that drones have been used during U.S. protests in support of law enforcement efforts. Back in 2020, CBP utilized drones at the height of protests in the Black Lives Matter movement spurred by the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police. At the time, however, CBP argued that its drones were not being used to 'surveil' protestors, but rather to provide 'assistance to state and locals so they could make sure that their cities and their towns were protected,' according to Acting CBP Commissioner Mark Morgan in a 2020 interview with ABC News. "We were not providing any resources to surveil lawful peaceful protesters. That's not what we were doing," he said. 'We weren't taking any information on law-abiding protesters, but we were absolutely there to ensure the safety of folks there as well as to enforce, and make sure law and order remain.' Contact us at letters@
Time Magazine
12-06-2025
- Politics
- Time Magazine
U.S. Immigration Agency Using Drones Capable of Surveillance During L.A. Protests
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is using drones during the protests in Los Angeles, the department has confirmed, further fueling controversy surrounding the escalating law enforcement response to the demonstrations that broke out as immigration raids occurred throughout the city. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP), an agency within DHS, confirmed on Thursday that it is providing 'aerial support' to law enforcement. "Air and Marine Operations (AMO) is providing aerial support to federal law enforcement partners conducting operations in the Greater Los Angeles area. AMO's efforts are focused on situational awareness and officer safety support as requested,' a CBP spokesperson told TIME via email. DHS shared footage of the protests shot with a drone on social media earlier in the week. 'WATCH: DHS drone footage of LA rioters,' the department wrote via an X post on June 10, which included video of cars burning and an apparent explosion accompanied by sinister music. 'California politicians must call off their rioting mob.' The protests in Los Angeles have been predominantly peaceful as they enter their seventh day, media on the ground has reported, though some have escalated as cars have been set on fire and projectiles have been thrown. Despite that, President Donald Trump has deployed thousands of National Guard members and is mobilizing hundreds of Marines to the area, against the wishes of state and local leaders. Local law enforcement has also used crowd control tactics such as rubber bullets and tear gas, and Mayor Karen Bass has declared a state of 'local emergency' and imposed an ongoing 8 p.m. to 6 p.m. curfew. Since the protests began on Friday, more than 160 people have been arrested by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). The majority of those arrests, according to the New York Times, occurred on Monday, and a majority of them were based on failure to disperse charges. CBP confirmed to 404 media that the drones used by the agency were two Predator drones after the media company reported that drones were spotted flying without call signs where the anti-ICE protests were occurring. Does DHS have the authority to use drones? Department of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth addressed reports of the drones in a June 11 hearing with Congress. Rhode Island Senator Jack Reed asked Hegseth if he was prepared for DHS to use drones to 'to detain or arrest American citizens.' 'Every authorization we've provided the National Guard and the Marines in Los Angeles is under the authority of the President of the United States,' Hegseth answered. According to Alejandra Montoya-Boyer, senior director of the Center for Civil Rights & Technology at the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, tech groups and civil rights groups alike are "surprised and deeply concerned' by the use of drones, but it is not "necessarily new.' 'CBP has a pretty expansive opportunity to be able to deploy drone technology and other technologies that are able to surveil and track anyone, whether they're crossing the border or in these spaces,' Montoya-Boyer tells TIME. She says 'this isn't necessarily the first time we're seeing this,' but noted that it could still be harmful and 'disproportionately impacting communities of color and immigrants right now.' She says people are often unaware of the extent of land that CBP has access to—100 air miles from any external boundary of the U.S, a border zone that almost two-thirds of the U.S. population lives within. Montoya-Boyer says that the technology used by these drones was created to track border crossings, not to be used to track U.S. citizens at protests. 'The reality is, with the development of these types of technologies, and with appropriations by CBP and DHS, they can be used for domestic surveillance and as needed by an administration that isn't necessarily doing what's usual,' she says. Though the CBP has stated that the drones are focused on 'situational awareness' and 'officer safety,' Montoyta-Boyers says there 'is no reason for us to believe that it is just in the name of law and order' as 'there is an increase, an expansion of surveillance technologies in the name of immigration enforcement being deployed all across the country on the majority of people, whether they're immigrants or not She recommends those who decide to lawfully and peacefully protest to access both the ACLU 's and Electronic Frontier Foundation 's guides to what protestors' rights are. Have drones been used during previous U.S. protests? This is not the first time that drones have been used during U.S. protests in support of law enforcement efforts. Back in 2020, CBP utilized drones at the height of protests in the Black Lives Matter movement spurred by the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police. At the time, however, CBP argued that its drones were not being used to 'surveil' protestors, but rather to provide 'assistance to state and locals so they could make sure that their cities and their towns were protected,' according to Acting CBP Commissioner Mark Morgan in a 2020 interview with ABC News. "We were not providing any resources to surveil lawful peaceful protesters. That's not what we were doing," he said. 'We weren't taking any information on law-abiding protesters, but we were absolutely there to ensure the safety of folks there as well as to enforce, and make sure law and order remain.'
Yahoo
08-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ontario anti-encampment law punishes the homeless, avoids long-term solutions: critics
A new provincial law that aims to clear encampments from public spaces does not address the root causes behind homelessness and punishes people who have no access to affordable shelter, critics say. The Safer Municipalities Act, which passed last Tuesday in the Ontario legislature, gives municipalities and police "enhanced tools they need to end encampments and clean up our parks and public spaces," according to a provincial news release from April. But the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), which represents all 444 municipalities in the province, says the law does not provide longer-term, permanent solutions for homelessness — an issue municipalities across the province have described as a top concern in recent years. "It doesn't really focus at all on the root causes of homelessness ... the lack of deeply affordable housing, the lack of mental health and addictions services at the levels that we need them, as well as some of these basic issues around income support," said Lindsay Jones, the AMO's director of policy and government relations. Under the legislation, the province will spend $50 million to help create 1,239 additional housing units, and $20 million to create 971 additional shelter and temporary accommodation spaces. It will also put $5.5 million toward the Canada-Ontario Housing Benefit to "immediately free-up emergency shelter spaces for people living in encampments" by helping around 1,000 people living in shelters move into longer-term housing, the news release said. WATCH | Ford first introduced the legislation in December: While Jones called the spending encouraging, she said its "a drop in the bucket" compared to the nearly $2 billion the AMO estimates is needed to end encampments in Ontario. More than 80,000 people in Ontario were homeless last year, according to an AMO report. The association previously found there were about 1,400 encampments across the province in 2023. CBC Toronto has reached out to the province for comment. Jones said the Safer Municipalities Act is particularly focused on enforcement. The law strengthens penalties for people who "deliberately and continually break the law by adding the new aggravating factors of continuous trespassing and the likelihood to reoffend," the provincial news release said. People convicted of a trespass offence may face a fine of up to $10,000, according to the bill. The legislation also allows police officers to issue a ticket or arrest people who do not comply with an order to stop using illegal substances in public and to leave the public place. People found guilty of violating the legislation may face fines of up to $10,000 or up to six months in prison. The province will explore "judicial approaches" that provide rehabilitation as an alternative to jail time for minor or non-violent drug crimes, the provincial news release said. When Ontario Premier Doug Ford first introduced the Safer Municipalities Act in December, he said encampments "are taking over public spaces, with illegal drug use happening out in the open, creating huge safety risks for people and communities." "Enough is enough, this has to stop and it will stop," Ford added. But Diane Chan McNally, a community worker in Toronto who works with people who live in encampments, says the Safer Municipalities Act is punishing those who have no access to affordable housing. "We're misdiagnosing the actual problem. We're suggesting that the issue is people using drugs in public when the issue is actually that people have nowhere affordable for them to live," she said. McNally said there is a stereotype that people who live in encampments are heavy drug users involved in criminal activity. The reality is that "every kind of person" lives in encampments because they cannot afford housing, she said. The people she has worked with include an 84-year-old woman who started living in an encampment after her spouse died and she could no longer afford housing. WATCH | Ford has said he is prepared to use notwithstanding clause to clear encampments: Many people who live in encampments are concerned they will be targeted under the new legislation regardless of whether they use drugs or not, McNally said. Catherine McKenney, NDP MPP for Ottawa Centre, said the legislation could also fuel a cycle where people who have been imprisoned will struggle to get housing once they're released because they have a criminal record, McKenney said. "Prison beds are not housing," McKenney said. The legislation may also infringe on the rights of people who are trying to seek shelter, said Harini Sivalingam, director of the equality program at Canadian Civil Liberties Association. In Ontario, there is strong case law — meaning law based on previous judicial decisions — that establishes people have a right to seek shelter when there are no available shelter options for them overnight, she said. "'The government can't deprive them of that right by evicting them overnight when they have nowhere else they can go for safety and security," Sivalingam said. Last year, before the act was introduced, Ford pledged to use the notwithstanding clause that would override the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms if the courts were to "interfere" with the legislation. He made the pledge in a letter to 12 mayors who asked him to use the clause to clear encampments. In April's provincial news release, 16 mayors across the province indicated their support for the Safer Municipalities Act. Community groups and advocates in the province are exploring legal avenues to stop the enforcement of the Safer Municipalities Act, Sivalingam said. "The government is trying to seek shortcuts that will impact important rights and freedoms," she said.
CBC
08-06-2025
- Politics
- CBC
Ontario anti-encampment law punishes the homeless, avoids long-term solutions: critics
Social Sharing A new provincial law that aims to clear encampments from public spaces does not address the root causes behind homelessness and punishes people who have no access to affordable shelter, critics say. The Safer Municipalities Act, which passed last Tuesday in the Ontario legislature, gives municipalities and police "enhanced tools they need to end encampments and clean up our parks and public spaces," according to a provincial news release from April. But the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), which represents all 444 municipalities in the province, says the law does not provide longer-term, permanent solutions for homelessness — an issue municipalities across the province have described as a top concern in recent years. "It doesn't really focus at all on the root causes of homelessness ... the lack of deeply affordable housing, the lack of mental health and addictions services at the levels that we need them, as well as some of these basic issues around income support," said Lindsay Jones, the AMO's director of policy and government relations. Under the legislation, the province will spend $50 million to help create 1,239 additional housing units, and $20 million to create 971 additional shelter and temporary accommodation spaces. It will also put $5.5 million toward the Canada-Ontario Housing Benefit to "immediately free-up emergency shelter spaces for people living in encampments" by helping around 1,000 people living in shelters move into longer-term housing, the news release said. WATCH | Ford first introduced the legislation in December: 'Enough is enough': Ford details legislation aimed at dismantling homeless encampments 6 months ago Duration 2:02 While Jones called the spending encouraging, she said its "a drop in the bucket" compared to the nearly $2 billion the AMO estimates is needed to end encampments in Ontario. More than 80,000 people in Ontario were homeless last year, according to an AMO report. The association previously found there were about 1,400 encampments across the province in 2023. CBC Toronto has reached out to the province for comment. Law misdiagnoses problem: community worker Jones said the Safer Municipalities Act is particularly focused on enforcement. The law strengthens penalties for people who "deliberately and continually break the law by adding the new aggravating factors of continuous trespassing and the likelihood to reoffend," the provincial news release said. People convicted of a trespass offence may face a fine of up to $10,000, according to the bill. The legislation also allows police officers to issue a ticket or arrest people who do not comply with an order to stop using illegal substances in public and to leave the public place. People found guilty of violating the legislation may face fines of up to $10,000 or up to six months in prison. The province will explore "judicial approaches" that provide rehabilitation as an alternative to jail time for minor or non-violent drug crimes, the provincial news release said. When Ontario Premier Doug Ford first introduced the Safer Municipalities Act in December, he said encampments "are taking over public spaces, with illegal drug use happening out in the open, creating huge safety risks for people and communities." "Enough is enough, this has to stop and it will stop," Ford added. But Diane Chan McNally, a community worker in Toronto who works with people who live in encampments, says the Safer Municipalities Act is punishing those who have no access to affordable housing. "We're misdiagnosing the actual problem. We're suggesting that the issue is people using drugs in public when the issue is actually that people have nowhere affordable for them to live," she said. McNally said there is a stereotype that people who live in encampments are heavy drug users involved in criminal activity. The reality is that "every kind of person" lives in encampments because they cannot afford housing, she said. The people she has worked with include an 84-year-old woman who started living in an encampment after her spouse died and she could no longer afford housing. WATCH | Ford has said he is prepared to use notwithstanding clause to clear encampments: Is eviction the answer to Ontario's homeless encampment problem? | Canada Tonight 6 months ago Duration 12:38 The Ontario government plans to crack down on homeless encampments through new legislation, with Premier Doug Ford even pledging to use the notwithstanding clause if necessary. But is the dismantling of the encampments and eviction of their residents a long-term solution? Diana Chan McNally, community worker and advocate, and Cam Guthrie, one of the 12 mayors that asked Ford to use the notwithstanding clause to remove encampments from public spaces, discuss more. Many people who live in encampments are concerned they will be targeted under the new legislation regardless of whether they use drugs or not, McNally said. Catherine McKenney, NDP MPP for Ottawa Centre, said the legislation could also fuel a cycle where people who have been imprisoned will struggle to get housing once they're released because they have a criminal record, McKenney said. "Prison beds are not housing," McKenney said. Law could violate people's rights, CCLA says The legislation may also infringe on the rights of people who are trying to seek shelter, said Harini Sivalingam, director of the equality program at Canadian Civil Liberties Association. In Ontario, there is strong case law — meaning law based on previous judicial decisions — that establishes people have a right to seek shelter when there are no available shelter options for them overnight, she said. "'The government can't deprive them of that right by evicting them overnight when they have nowhere else they can go for safety and security," Sivalingam said. Last year, before the act was introduced, Ford pledged to use the notwithstanding clause that would override the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms if the courts were to "interfere" with the legislation. He made the pledge in a letter to 12 mayors who asked him to use the clause to clear encampments. In April's provincial news release, 16 mayors across the province indicated their support for the Safer Municipalities Act. Community groups and advocates in the province are exploring legal avenues to stop the enforcement of the Safer Municipalities Act, Sivalingam said.
