The Tech Tools of ICE
Robots, Apps, Towers and Drones

We’ve been reading about the devolution in Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) hiring standards, with minimal vetting of new employees and few experience requirements. Now, even Spot will be working for ICE. The agency is paying $5 million for four of the robotic dogs, known as “Spot.” The critter has four legs, cameras and sensors, "for inspection, situational awareness, and hazard assessment in environments that may pose risks to personnel," according to the Department of Homeland Security.

Boston Dynamics, the manufacturer of Spot, says it prohibits "any attempted weaponization of Boston Dynamics’ robots." The company cites its bold company ethics statement, including this language, that appears in the contract:

We believe robotic use must comply with privacy and civil rights laws.

We will not authorize nor partner with those who wish to use our robots in a way that violates privacy and civil rights laws. We understand that emerging artificial intelligence technologies, including computer vision and personal identification algorithms, raise questions about the ethics, legality, and potential for bias around their use in the public sphere.

We work thoughtfully with US federal, state and local governments, and their allies.

We believe serving government customers tasked with preserving safety and security is in alignment with our mission as long as that work remains consistent with our terms of use, which prohibit weaponization, targeting and violation of privacy and civil rights laws.

But it’s belied by the thinness of the contract language. What stood out, when I reviewed the contract, was the absence of consequences for contract violations.

As I described in the first two parts of this series on The Tech Tools of ICE, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its subsidiary agency, ICE, have been rapidly acquiring surveillance tools, like Spot, with broad implications for our privacy and civil rights.

ICE uses technologies that hack cell phones, trace location, and build portraits of our locations, habits, relationships, calendars, and priorities. They purchase personal information from data brokers and contract for massive data analytics projects that draw inferences about how people will act. ICE outsources its searches to private companies to track down last known addresses of targeted non-citizens. It pays contractors to generate address information for as many as 50,000 people per month so that ICE can proceed with raids or process service.

There are two other types of tech tools that I want to highlight before turning to ICE’s relationships with its contractors next month. The first is detention and deportation tracking apps, described by some as “digital cages.” These apps utilize ankle monitors, wrist watches, and cell phones to track 180,000 migrants’ daily movements. Whereas, under the Biden administration, these trackers enabled migrants to schedule their immigration-related appointments, under Kristi Noem’s leadership, migrants who entered through legal channels instead were instructed to self-deport or be arrested. The legal status of nearly one million migrants has been revoked, utilizing tracking app technologies to deliver judgment.

The second tool is towers and drones. Towers are used at the northern and southern borders, and within 100 miles of the border. They may be fixed or portable. The largest contractor, Anduril, will have provided the majority of fixed towers over the next few years, bringing the total number to over 2,000. In the first half of 2026 alone, Anduril’s contract with ICE doubled to over $363 million from the prior year. The technological capabilities of the towers are astonishing; one type, from Israeli contractor, Elbit, can identify people 7.5 miles away.

Drones present the most immediate risk to the civil rights of the population. In part, it’s because police departments, as well as ICE, are increasing their use. But equally, or more alarming, is the incursion of drones into the interior of the US, past the 100-mile boundary of ICE’s jurisdiction, by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ICE’s parent agency. AI powered drones can identify individuals a mile away. DHS has deployed drones to surveil at anti-ICE rallies in Los Angeles and No Kings rallies in New York City. Protestors have been arrested based on drone footage. The boundaries established for civilian use of drones are tied to distance from DHS facilities, but actually move along with ICE’s drones; essentially, wherever a DHS drone is deployed becomes a no-fly zone for civilians’ drones. This curtails civilians’ ability to monitor ICE drones’ behavior.

In next month’s Retiree Advocate, I’ll explore the revolving door and conflicts of interest between tech company leadership, tech sector leadership, and government leadership. Finally, I’ll explore the strategies we need to build the movement to dislodge the surveillance state.