The Department of Homeland Security is quietly asking tech companies to turn over user information about critics of the Trump administration, according to reports.

In several cases in recent months, Homeland Security has relied on the use of administrative subpoenas to seek identifying information about individuals who run anonymous Instagram accounts, sharing posts about ICE immigration raids in their local neighborhoods. These subpoenas are also used to request information about people who criticize Trump officials or protest government policies.

Unlike judicial subpoenas, which are authorized by a judge after finding enough evidence of a crime to authorize a search or seizure of a person’s belongings, administrative subpoenas are issued by federal agencies, which allow investigators to seek large amounts of information about individuals from technology and telephone companies without the supervision of a judge.

While administrative subpoenas cannot be used to obtain the contents of a person’s email, online search, or data locationthey may request information specifically about the user, such as what time a user logs in, from where, using which devices, and disclosure of email addresses and other identifiable information about who opened an online account. But because administrative subpoenas are not backed by the authority of a judge or court order, it is largely up to a company whether to hand over any data to the requesting government agency.

Administrative subpoenas are not new; the use of these self-signed requests by Trump officials to seek identifiable information about people critical of the president’s policies is alarming.

Bloomberg reported last week that Homeland Security is looking for the identity of an anonymous Instagram account called @montocowatchwhich says its goal is to share resources to help protect the rights of immigrants and due process throughout Montgomery County in Pennsylvania. It comes amid an ongoing federal immigration crackdown across the United States, which has drawn widespread protests and condemnation. Homeland Security lawyers sent an administrative subpoena to Meta demanding that it turn over personal information about the person who ran the account, citing a non-Homeland Security employee who claimed to have received a tip that ICE agents were being stalked.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the owner of the account, says there is no evidence of wrongdoing and that the police recording, sharing that recording, and making it anonymous are legal and protected under the First Amendment. Homeland Security revoked its subpoena without giving an explanation.

The ACLU called the subpoena “part of a broader strategy to intimidate people who document immigration activity or criticize government actions.”

Bloomberg reports the effort to unmask the @montcowatch account is not an isolated incident, citing at least four other cases in which Homeland Security officials have used administrative subpoenas in efforts to identify people who run Instagram accounts that publish content critical of the government. Those subpoenas were also withdrawn after the account owners sued to block the trial.

Tech companies in recent years have published transparency reports detailing how much the government is asking for the data they receive. But most do not mention how many judicial and administrative subpoenas they receive over a period of time, even though the two types of demands are fundamentally different.

When asked by TechCrunch, Meta spokesperson Francis Brennan did not say whether Meta provided Homeland Security with any data involving @montcowatch or whether the company was asked to provide information about the account in another way.

A new report by The Washington Post on Tuesday found that an administrative subpoena was also used to seek information from Google about an American retiree within hours of him sending a critical email to lead Homeland Security attorney Joseph Dernbach. The retiree’s home was later visited by federal agents who asked about the email.

The Post described the retiree as someone critical of Trump during his first term, who attended a No Kings rally last yearregularly attending rallies and protests, and writing criticisms to lawmakers, all actions protected under the First Amendment.

Within five hours of emailing the Homeland Security attorney – who was named in an article about the case of an Afghan whom the US is trying to deport and whose email address is listed on the website of the Florida Bar – the retiree received an email from Google, according to The Washington Post. The email informed him that his account had been subpoenaed by the Department of Homeland Security.

The subpoena demanded to know the day, time, and duration of all of his online sessions, his IP address and physical address, and a list of every service he used, and any other usernames and identifiable information associated with his account, such as his credit card, driver’s license, and Social Security numbers.

Two weeks later, Homeland Security agents were at his door, questioning him about the email he had sent to Dernbach, which the agents claimed did not violate any laws.

Google spokeswoman Katelin Jabbari told TechCrunch that the company is pushing back against overbroad or improper subpoenas, “as we did in this instance,” referring to the subpoena referenced in The Washington Post’s reporting.

When asked by TechCrunch, Homeland Security assistant secretary Tricia McLaughlin would not say why the US was seeking information about people critical of the Trump administration and accounts documenting ICE activity, or say why the subpoenas were revoked.

“HSI has broad administrative subpoena authority under 8 USC § 1225 (d) and 19 USC § 1509 (a) (1) to issue subpoenas,” McLaughlin said, referring to Homeland Security Investigations, an investigative unit within ICE.

Not all companies are able to hand over data about their customers. For example, information is end-to-end encrypted and can only be accessed by picking up a person’s phone or device. That said, many companies are still able to provide a wealth of information about their users, including where they log in, how they log in, and from where, which may allow investigators to unmask anonymous accounts.

End-to-end encrypted messaging apps, like Signal, have long emphasized how little data it collects about its users. The messaging app responds to occasional legal demands by saying it is cannot create user data which is not necessary to begin with.

The reliance on US tech giants is another reason why European countries and ordinary consumers are looking to trust American tech giants less, at a time when the chief executives and senior leaders of some of the biggest US tech companies are apparently pleased with the Trump administration.