An Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent appears to have accidentally exposed the existence of secret Department of Homeland Security watchlists used to track Americans who film federal officers, according to new exclusive reporting by investigative journalist Ken Klippenstein.
The revelation stems from a now-viral video in which a masked ICE agent is confronted by a woman questioning why officers were recording her and running her license plate. The agent’s response was blunt.
“Because we have a nice little database,” the agent said.
When the woman replied, “Oh, good,” the agent added: “And now you’re considered a domestic terrorist.”
Really American has grown by over 100,000 subscribers across platforms, but independent journalism depends on reader support. Subscribe to Really American so we can continue bringing you breaking news, original reporting, and exclusive investigations like this one.
The exchange, captured on video, prompted Klippenstein to contact sources inside Homeland Security. What they described points to a sprawling, largely secret domestic surveillance system that has never been publicly acknowledged by DHS or meaningfully examined by Congress.
Protesters Filmed, Identified, and Added to Intelligence Systems
According to multiple current and former national security officials who spoke with Klippenstein, DHS and ICE agents have been instructed to photograph and document individuals who film law enforcement during protests or enforcement actions.
That information is then sent to intelligence units for what agents refer to as a “run up.”
A “run up,” sources said, involves identifying a person’s license plate, home address, name, and personal associations. That data can then be stored and retained in internal watchlists used across DHS and related agencies.
Officials told Klippenstein that some of these lists contain not only protesters, but also friends, family members, and associates who have committed no crimes and may not even be aware they were collected.
A Web of Secret Databases — Even DHS Doesn’t Fully Understand
One of the most striking findings, Klippenstein reported, is that many DHS personnel themselves do not fully understand how many surveillance systems exist or how they operate.
Different officials described different databases, often unaware of others running in parallel. Several of the systems operate under internal code names, including Blue Key, Grapevine, Hummingbird, Reaper, Sandcastle, Sienna, Slipstream, and Sparta.
Some systems were originally developed for immigration vetting, such as tracking Afghan refugees. Others have evolved into broader intelligence tools used for domestic data collection.
Slipstream, according to sources, functions as a classified social-media and relational mapping repository, linking individuals based on proximity, online activity, and social connections — even when no criminal behavior is alleged.
Filming ICE May Trigger Surveillance
Under current DHS policy, filming ICE officers can be treated as “impeding law enforcement operations,” a classification that allows officers to justify recording civilians in return.
While ICE agents frequently conceal their own identities using masks, those who film them risk having their identities captured, processed, and stored by intelligence units.
Civil liberties advocates warn that this effectively punishes constitutionally protected activity by transforming it into grounds for surveillance.
AI and Data Integration Accelerate Monitoring
The expansion of these systems has been fueled by advances in artificial intelligence and large-scale data processing, according to Klippenstein’s reporting.
DHS and ICE maintain extensive contracts with firms such as Palantir, which provide tools allowing analysts to merge disparate datasets into unified profiles.
Officials said this technology eliminates what agencies once called the “needle in a haystack” problem — the inability to process massive volumes of collected data. With AI, they can now identify patterns, networks, and associations at scale.
That capability is being deployed amid heightened suspicion within the Trump administration that protests are being coordinated by hidden domestic networks, a belief officials described as genuine rather than rhetorical.
Legal Gray Zones and Constitutional Concerns
DHS has never publicly acknowledged the existence of these watchlists or explained how individuals are placed on them, how long data is retained, or how someone can challenge inclusion.
The Privacy Act restricts long-term retention of personal data, but broad law-enforcement exceptions allow agencies to claim national security or investigative justification.
Klippenstein said those justifications are likely classified, shielding the programs from public scrutiny while technically complying with the letter of the law.
Civil liberties experts argue that the practice violates the spirit of the Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Congress Silent as Surveillance Expands
Despite Congress’s authority to investigate and regulate DHS surveillance programs, Klippenstein found no public hearings, legislative debates, or disclosures related to the identified systems.
Lawmakers are either unaware of the programs or have chosen not to address them, he said.
Internal dissent, however, appears to be growing. Multiple DHS employees told Klippenstein they are uncomfortable with the scope of surveillance and believe it exceeds what the public would accept if fully disclosed.
As public attention increases, those officials have begun speaking out.
For now, the databases remain in place — unseen, unexplained, and growing.
More Soon,
Really American Team
