The Department of Homeland Security (**DHS**) is under scrutiny following revelations that its investigative arm, **HSI**, issued a subpoena to **REI**, seeking customer data related to the purchase of a specific dark green beanie. The request, which sought information on “all persons” in the greater Minneapolis–St. Paul area who bought the item since 2024, is part of a broader legal action against 39 individuals involved in an **ICE** protest. ### Unpacking the Subpoena Spree Court documents indicate that the **REI** subpoena is one of 92 issued by **HSI** in its investigation. Other recipients included social media giants, airlines, telecom providers, a car rental company, and a state employment agency. Alarmingly, at least one subpoena sent to an unnamed airline reportedly requested future “lookout notifications” for a defendant's travel. Both **DHS** and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota have declined to comment on the necessity of identifying every beanie purchaser or the specific targeting of **REI** customers, despite the beanie being sold elsewhere. ### The Controversial 1509 Customs Summons The subpoenas in question are known as **1509 customs summons**, a legal tool intended for information related to imports and exports. However, since the start of the Trump administration, reports from **WIRED**, **The Intercept**, and other news outlets have highlighted **DHS**'s increasing use of these summonses to unmask online critics, often without judicial oversight. Senator **Ron Wyden** of Oregon has strongly condemned **DHS**'s actions, stating, “It’s flat-out absurd for **DHS** to demand **REI** search two years of customer data as part of Trump’s campaign against the people of Minneapolis. Customs summonses only allow **DHS** to request information directly related to compliance with customs laws, not to conduct unending fishing expeditions into the lives of people critical of **Donald Trump**.” ### Corporate Responses Vary The total number of **1509 summonses** issued and the extent of personal data collected by **DHS** remain unknown, as companies are typically asked to keep these requests confidential. Public awareness often arises only when a target contests the summons or is notified by the recipient company. Internal **DHS** documents and company statements reveal a mixed bag of responses from corporations: * **T-Mobile** reportedly provided six months of call and text message logs for journalist **Georgia Fort**, a defendant in the Minnesota case, without notifying her or her attorneys. A **T-Mobile** spokesperson stated the company reviews government demands carefully and responds in accordance with the law. * **Google** refused to comply with a customs summons requesting information about **Fort**’s **YouTube** viewers and subscribers, citing its policy of reviewing requests for lawfulness and rejecting overly broad demands. * **Reddit** recently disclosed that it received **DHS** administrative subpoenas for 11 accounts making critical posts about **ICE** actions in late 2025. After **Reddit** objected on First Amendment grounds, **DHS** withdrew the subpoenas. **Ben Lee**, **Reddit**’s outgoing chief legal officer, emphasized the company’s commitment to user privacy and First Amendment rights. * **Meta** also pushed back against at least one customs summons, according to internal **DHS** correspondence obtained by the **Electronic Frontier Foundation** (**EFF**). **Meta** declined to comment. **Mario Trujillo**, a senior staff attorney at the **EFF**, expressed deep concern, stating, “I think **DHS** has proved time and time again that they can’t be trusted as the stewards of applying this law correctly.” He suggests that congressional action is needed to restrict the use of **1509 customs summons** and introduce penalties for misuse, as companies and their customers are currently left to navigate these challenges independently.