Apple pulls ICEBlock tracking app following Justice Department demand

[midian182]

A hot potato: Apple has removed ICEBlock, a tracking tool that shows the most recent locations of ICE agents, from its App Store following a demand from the DoJ. Attorney General Pam Bondi said the app was designed to put ICE agents at risk "just for doing their jobs."

ICEBlock allows users to anonymously report the most recent sightings of ICE agents by dropping a pin on a map and sharing those reports with others in their vicinity. Reports are limited to one per user every five minutes and are automatically deleted after a few hours to prevent outdated information from circulating.

ICEBlock's website states that the app ensures user privacy by storing no personal data, making it impossible to trace reports back to individual users.

According to Fox Business, Bondi demanded that Apple remove ICEBlock from its store, which it did along with several other apps that offered similar functionality.

"ICEBlock is designed to put ICE agents at risk just for doing their jobs, and violence against law enforcement is an intolerable red line that cannot be crossed," Bondi added. "This Department of Justice will continue making every effort to protect our brave federal law enforcement officers, who risk their lives every day to keep Americans safe."

This sure looks like obstruction of justice. Our brave ICE law enforcement face a 500% increase in assaults against them.

If you obstruct or assault our law enforcement, we will hunt you down and you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. pic.twitter.com/4ZcfrpyRV1

– Secretary Kristi Noem (@Sec_Noem) June 30, 2025

The demand came after the FBI reported the gunman behind the deadly shooting at an ICE field office in Dallas, Texas, last month had searched his phone for tracking apps, including ICEBlock. The shooter opened fire from a rooftop, killing two immigrants and injuring a third, though he was allegedly targeting ICE agents. The FBI said a bullet was found with "ANTI-ICE" written on it.

Apple confirmed that it removed ICEBlock and the other apps. "We created the App Store to be a safe and trusted place to discover apps," Apple said in a statement. "Based on information we've received from law enforcement about the safety risks associated with ICEBlock, we have removed it and similar apps from the App Store."

Joshua Aaron, ICEBlock's creator, said he was "incredibly disappointed" by Apple's actions. "Capitulating to an authoritarian regime is never the right move," Aaron said. "Apple has claimed they received information from law enforcement that ICEBlock served to harm law enforcement officers. This is patently false."

Aaron said ICEBlock has more than 1.1 million users and works like other crowdsourcing mapping apps used for locating speed traps, such as Apple's own map service.

"We are determined to fight this with everything we have. Our mission has always been to protect our neighbors from the terror this administration continues to rain down on the people of this nation," Aaron added.

In July, acting ICE Director Todd Lyons slammed ICEBlock as being "reckless and irresponsible," claiming that it "paints a target on federal law enforcement officers' backs."

Ironically, it was this controversy and ensuing publicity that pushed ICEBlock to the top of the App Store.

ICEBlock's website states that there is no Android version of the app as achieving its required level of anonymity on Google's platform is not feasible due to the inherent requirements of push notification services.

Last month, San Francisco's Municipal Transportation Agency shut down a tracking website that worked in the same way as ICEBlock. Users could place a pin on a map showing the last reported location of traffic enforcement officers. It also showed how much money in fines each officer had handed out each day.

Permalink to story:

Apple pulls ICEBlock tracking app following Justice Department demand

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Seems reasonable, given the spike in political violence lately. If you cant play nice, your toys get taken away.

""We are determined to fight this with everything we have. Our mission has always been to protect our neighbors from the terror this administration continues to rain down on the people of this nation," Aaron added."

Enforcing the law is terror now. SMH. Same people clutching pearls over "state lines" during the Rittenhouse trial.

 

[PXAbstraction]

"Apple is the only tech company that cares about your privacy!"

No one gets to claim that ever again.

 

[PXAbstraction]

Seems reasonable, given the spike in political violence lately. If you cant play nice, your toys get taken away.

""We are determined to fight this with everything we have. Our mission has always been to protect our neighbors from the terror this administration continues to rain down on the people of this nation," Aaron added."

Enforcing the law is terror now. SMH. Same people clutching pearls over "state lines" during the Rittenhouse trial.

What Trump is doing is literally unconstitutional, one of many unconstitutional things he's done thus far. That you'd talk about enforcing the law unironically is as sad as it is insane.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

What Trump is doing is literally unconstitutional, one of many unconstitutional things he's done thus far. That you'd talk about enforcing the law unironically is as sad as it is insane.

What part of ICE arresting illegal aliens is unconstitutional?

 

[JMGuy]

What part of ICE arresting illegal aliens is unconstitutional?

None. Too many citizens of this country are uneducated and do not know or understand basic civics.

Joshua Aaron, ICEBlock's creator, said he was "incredibly disappointed" by Apple's actions. "Capitulating to an authoritarian regime is never the right move," Aaron said. "Apple has claimed they received information from law enforcement that ICEBlock served to harm law enforcement officers. This is patently false."

There’s plenty to criticize about the current administration — I’m not a fan either. But comments like Josh's are part of the broader problem. He clearly doesn’t understand what an actual authoritarian regime looks like. In such a regime, he wouldn’t even be able to build an app like that, let alone publicly criticize the government without risking arrest or worse.

I get that he’s disappointed, and I applaud his effort to stand up for his perspective, but the fact that he can freely express his moral-outrage — and that it can be published and debated openly — completely undermines the claim that this specific action is “authoritarian” behavior. That freedom alone shows we’re far from it.

A little American history education is sorely needed by far too many of my fellow citizens. The truth is, we live in a far more equitable and free society today than most of our parents or grandparents ever did. Anyone claiming otherwise is either uninformed or deliberately pushing moral outrage to stoke division.

That said, I don’t deny fair concerns of what is clearly an administration that is absolutely tonally inflammatory, morally corrupt, and procedurally inept. And, I certainly do encourage dissent when it comes to a good portion of the current policy agenda.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

What part of ICE arresting illegal aliens is unconstitutional?

-The part where they don't actually have a warrant for anyone's arrest, and just go out into the street and arrest anyone who is brown first, then release anyone who happens to be a citizen later.

Being brown is not probable cause.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

None. Too many citizens of this country are uneducated and do not know or understand basic civics.



There’s plenty to criticize about the current administration — I’m not a fan either. But comments like Josh's are part of the broader problem. He clearly doesn’t understand what an actual authoritarian regime looks like. In such a regime, he wouldn’t even be able to build an app like that, let alone publicly criticize the government without risking arrest or worse.

-Yikes!

Authoritarianism takes many forms, but a key indicator it is a government that is no longer accountable to the people.

When the government decides the people no longer have a right or ability to monitor or observe the movements of police in order to keep them honest, it's a huge step in the wrong direction.

Police are people that we choose to give an enormous amount of power and authority to. If there is anyone who should have additional civilian oversight, it is the police. If you want all that power, you need to accept additional accountability and oversight.

 

[lna2000]

Aaron said. "Apple has claimed they received information from law enforcement that ICEBlock served to harm law enforcement officers. This is patently false."

Rent a Riot is the only possible use for this app. ICE is looking for illegal non-citizens. The Constitution does not provide these people with rights that citizens have. If you will take the time to read the Constitution, your yellow hi-lighter will never touch the paper.
Plus, illegal means you have broken existing laws, just like when you speed while driving, you become an illegal driver and subject to a fine and possible imprisonment.
If you want productionable rights for what are now illegals, change the Constitution, and STOP changing the meaning of words to fit you storyline.

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

-The part where they don't actually have a warrant for anyone's arrest, and just go out into the street and arrest anyone who is brown first, then release anyone who happens to be a citizen later.

Being brown is not probable cause.

ICE doesn’t make warrantless arrests based on being brown alone lol, they do need probable cause. Also they make plenty of arrests with warrants, and here’s one where they arrested 475 people legally: https://apnews.com/article/us-south-korea-ice-raid-georgia-hyundai-9394482c195664d7cc3db67ae998ac05

-Yikes!

Authoritarianism takes many forms, but a key indicator it is a government that is no longer accountable to the people.

When the government decides the people no longer have a right or ability to monitor or observe the movements of police in order to keep them honest, it's a huge step in the wrong direction.

Police are people that we choose to give an enormous amount of power and authority to. If there is anyone who should have additional civilian oversight, it is the police. If you want all that power, you need to accept additional accountability and oversight.

Considering they shut down the app but you can still see ICE’s activities as public information, I think there’s plenty of reason to believe that ICE is accountable to the people. But I’ve never heard of people having the ability to watch the movement of police. Does the government have the right to watch our movements? Do police have the right to follow us around?

 

[axiomatic13]

LOL, the authoritarian supporters think it's OK to suppress the 1st and 4th amendment. That is hilariously, "on brand" for authoritarians! Hahahahahaha! You guys have the self awareness of a toddler.

 

[KevNS]

In such a regime, he wouldn’t even be able to build an app like that, let alone publicly criticize the government without risking arrest or worse.

It does appear as if the administration was looking into having him prosecuted. Perhaps we're still in aspirational authoritarianism for now.

https://www.wired.com/story/trump-o...block-app-lawyers-say-thats-unconstitutional/

 

[GodisanAtheist]

Rent a Riot is the only possible use for this app.

- Then you need to think a little outside your box. The government wants to hide from us, the people, where their officers are. This app ensures that citizens are able to observe and report on the behavior of our employees: ICE officers.

Or do you think employers don't have a right to observe their employees?

ICE is looking for illegal non-citizens. The Constitution does not provide these people with rights that citizens have.

- Shockingly wrong. The constitution makes a point to draw a distinction between citizens and simply "people" under the US' jurisdiction. Unless you're arguing that illegals are not "people" in which case you have larger issues.

Please find where the rights of due process, a speedy and public trial, and protection from cruel and unusual punishment are applied to only citizens in the text:

Fourth Amendment​

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Sixth Amendment​

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Eighth Amendment​

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

If you will take the time to read the Constitution, your yellow hi-lighter will never touch the paper.
Plus, illegal means you have broken existing laws, just like when you speed while driving, you become an illegal driver and subject to a fine and possible imprisonment.

- The issue is in the execution. ICE is clearly bait for folks who like to see other people punished in a macho law and order way, rather than targeted checks of employers (our President being one of them) who deliberately seek out illegal immigrants and pay them under the table. More effective and less bombastic, but then where are the Newsmax and Fox News headlines going to come from?

If you want productionable rights for what are now illegals, change the Constitution, and STOP changing the meaning of words to fit you storyline.

- Again, Constitution and the Bill of Rights applies to all people in the country unless it specifically calls out "Citizen" in the text.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

ICE doesn’t make warrantless arrests based on being brown alone lol, they do need probable cause.

- So how exactly do you tell a non-citizen apart from a citizen? What is the probable cause to conduct public raids in one area vs another?

Also they make plenty of arrests with warrants, and here’s one where they arrested 475 people legally: https://apnews.com/article/us-south-korea-ice-raid-georgia-hyundai-9394482c195664d7cc3db67ae998ac05

- Good, as it should be. Keep doing warrant based raids on employers who hire illegal labor.

Considering they shut down the app but you can still see ICE’s activities as public information

-Where? Or do you mean "Trust the government to tell us the truth when they do choose to tell us" which doesn't have a great track record.

But I’ve never heard of people having the ability to watch the movement of police. Does the government have the right to watch our movements? Do police have the right to follow us around?

- Why not? Why would it be illegal for people to observe and report on police/federal officers? Surely if they are doing their jobs correctly they have nothing to hide?

And of course the government has the "right" to watch our movements in public, and they absolutely and unquestionably do. Police absolutely will follow you around in public or tail your car for long distances waiting for you to make an error so they can pull you over. What a strange thing to say.

 

[candle86]

LOL, the authoritarian supporters think it's OK to suppress the 1st and 4th amendment. That is hilariously, "on brand" for authoritarians! Hahahahahaha! You guys have the self awareness of a toddler.

Actually your first amendment rights stop were violence begins and people have been using this app to track ice and then physically assault the officers. That is not a first amendment right. As far as unreasonable search and seizure people engaged in certain activities do give probable cause to their status or being an areas commonly known to be associated with illegals gives probable cause to simply ask. You need to go take civics 101.

 

[candle86]

- Then you need to think a little outside your box. The government wants to hide from us, the people, where their officers are. This app ensures that citizens are able to observe and report on the behavior of our employees: ICE officers.

Or do you think employers don't have a right to observe their employees?


- Shockingly wrong. The constitution makes a point to draw a distinction between citizens and simply "people" under the US' jurisdiction. Unless you're arguing that illegals are not "people" in which case you have larger issues.

Please find where the rights of due process, a speedy and public trial, and protection from cruel and unusual punishment are applied to only citizens in the text:

Fourth Amendment​

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Sixth Amendment​

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Eighth Amendment​

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


- The issue is in the execution. ICE is clearly bait for folks who like to see other people punished in a macho law and order way, rather than targeted checks of employers (our President being one of them) who deliberately seek out illegal immigrants and pay them under the table. More effective and less bombastic, but then where are the Newsmax and Fox News headlines going to come from?


- Again, Constitution and the Bill of Rights applies to all people in the country unless it specifically calls out "Citizen" in the text.

Actually applies to all people subject to the jurisdiction of the United States government, any legal alien is not actually subject to the jurisdiction of our laws because to be subject to the jurisdiction first you must be known by the jurisdiction to it they're invisible thus they don't enjoy the same rights and protection. They don't have legal status immigration law is very clear here those without legal status to be in the country are subject to immediate deportation even if they win their court hearing they still get deported because the State department's not going to grant them a visa. As a matter of fact the penalty for being in the country illegally without a valid visa or for lying on your Visa is automatic expulsion with abandon reentry for 10 years. I judge doesn't have any say and whether he enforces us or not it's a fact say the person does not have a legal visa The only answer is deportation they have no legal right to be here. You really need to read the law again

 

[GodisanAtheist]

Actually applies to all people subject to the jurisdiction of the United States government, any legal alien is not actually subject to the jurisdiction of our laws because to be subject to the jurisdiction first you must be known by the jurisdiction to it they're invisible thus they don't enjoy the same rights and protection.

- I'm gonna need you to think about what you just said. If illegals aren't under the jurisdiction of the United States... ... ... then they are not subject to the laws of the United States and therefor cannot be illegal by definition or subject to enforcement action by the United States.

Illegals are absolutely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States or whatever respective state they reside in, and the constitution absolutely applies to them. If they commit felonies or misdemeanors outside of their "illegalness" then they are arrested and tried (and deported) like anyone else.

 

[Revolution 11]

Actually your first amendment rights stop were violence begins and people have been using this app to track ice and then physically assault the officers. That is not a first amendment right. As far as unreasonable search and seizure people engaged in certain activities do give probable cause to their status or being an areas commonly known to be associated with illegals gives probable cause to simply ask. You need to go take civics 101.

The app is the same as seeing a ICE officer and posting or saying in the public forum, here is the ICE officer. There is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about that, you are free to tell anyone you want about people you see in public, police officers included.

Violent behavior remains illegal whether the app is banned or not. Just because someone uses the app does not mean they aided some other person in violent behavior. That is like saying that cell phones are responsible for fraud conducted by SMS or phone call. What a utterly stupid statement.

The fact that you can't see this means you are the one who needs to go take Civics 101. If you can see this but don't care, you are the pro-authoritarian here.

 

[Che Cazzo]

There’s plenty to criticize about the current administration — I’m not a fan either. But comments like Josh's are part of the broader problem. He clearly doesn’t understand what an actual authoritarian regime looks like. In such a regime,

Not a fan?? LOL!! Yeah, sure.

One could tell we have reached the stage of being in a totally authoritarian stage of governing when people, can't tell the difference. Juts because it matches their agenda and they are very happy when freedom is a quaint memory.

PS: They are the same people, who just a couple of years ago, were hysterically shrieking about "States' Rights"..... but now will support the guy who told the military to practice ware fare in US cities... !
Yeah, not authoritarian at all!!

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

- So how exactly do you tell a non-citizen apart from a citizen? What is the probable cause to conduct public raids in one area vs another?

You can read about that here: https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/HTML/LSB10362.web.html

-Where? Or do you mean "Trust the government to tell us the truth when they do choose to tell us" which doesn't have a great track record.

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

www.ice.gov

https://locator.ice.gov/odls/#/search

- Why not? Why would it be illegal for people to observe and report on police/federal officers? Surely if they are doing their jobs correctly they have nothing to hide?

And of course the government has the "right" to watch our movements in public, and they absolutely and unquestionably do. Police absolutely will follow you around in public or tail your car for long distances waiting for you to make an error so they can pull you over. What a strange thing to say.

Police have limits of how far they can go to surveil (ie. targeting someone because they personally know them), and surveilling police has limits before it becomes obstruction of justice. But I guess you're right in this case considering what I actually said.

Either way, it was Apple that removed the apps after finding out they increased safety risks of officers. Apple said that violated their policies for that reason. But considering that the name of the app is ICEBlock, it definitely sounds like it was intended for obstruction of justice (block = obstruction, ICE = justice).

 

[GodisanAtheist]

You can read about that here: https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/HTML/LSB10362.web.html

- Kay.

While Section 1226 provides that an immigration-related arrest generally requires an administrative warrant, Section 1357(a)(2) lists two circumstances when an administrative warrant is not required for an immigration officer to arrest an alien for a suspected immigration violation:

• 1. the alien, in the presence or view of the immigration officer, is entering or attempting to enter the United States unlawfully; or
• 2. the immigration officer has "reason to believe" that the alien is in the United States unlawfully and is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained.

- Weird, we're back to "so how exactly does an immigration officer know if someone is a citizen or not"? We have even more questions now, what considerations go into "is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained"?
https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/HTML/LSB10362.web.html

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

www.ice.gov

https://locator.ice.gov/odls/#/search

- Awesome! So the government in all it's magnanimity has permitted us serfs to track detainees after their arrest and politely ask for information about our own taxpayer funded government, as documented and provided by our own government!

But how does that allow us to monitor police behavior and conduct?

If the police have nothing to hide, then there should be no issues with having people track and watch them, right?

Police have limits of how far they can go to surveil (ie. targeting someone because they personally know them), and surveilling police has limits before it becomes obstruction of justice. But I guess you're right in this case considering what I actually said.

- Police can absolutely observe you in a public place for as long as they like, and even then they can make up a "probable cause" to skirt just about any other rule they'd like.

Citizens absolutely have a right to observe and report on police activity and behavior. No one has suggested citizens need to intervene on the spot, simply documenting and sharing out police behavior. Not sure why anyone would have an issue with this.

We want to keep the government honest, ideally in real time, right?

Either way, it was Apple that removed the apps after finding out they increased safety risks of officers. Apple said that violated their policies for that reason. But considering that the name of the app is ICEBlock, it definitely sounds like it was intended for obstruction of justice (block = obstruction, ICE = justice).

- Yikes! So the app creators are guilty of thought crime it seems. I suppose it'd be ok if they renamed the app "ICEhugs" so that all the adoring fans of ICE could get out there and form a cheer squad and film when ICE conducts one of its warrantless "reason to believe" raids.

I never thought I'd say this, but thanks to Epic I guess this whole thing is just a sideload away I guess. They really should rename it to "ICEhugs" though.

 

[candle86]

The app is the same as seeing a ICE officer and posting or saying in the public forum, here is the ICE officer. There is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about that, you are free to tell anyone you want about people you see in public, police officers included.

Violent behavior remains illegal whether the app is banned or not. Just because someone uses the app does not mean they aided some other person in violent behavior. That is like saying that cell phones are responsible for fraud conducted by SMS or phone call. What a utterly stupid statement.

The fact that you can't see this means you are the one who needs to go take Civics 101. If you can see this but don't care, you are the pro-authoritarian here.

No actually I'm fully aware the app only has one relevant process and that is to harass immigration officials. It is quite simply a stalking app. Yes you could go out and shouting the street except your reach would be much much smaller and application like this on the other hand allows you to assemble hundreds of people possibly a thousand in a matter of moments. Vastly different. No this tool only exists for the sole reason of harassment and violence towards federal law enforcement.

 

[candle86]

- I'm gonna need you to think about what you just said. If illegals aren't under the jurisdiction of the United States... ... ... then they are not subject to the laws of the United States and therefor cannot be illegal by definition or subject to enforcement action by the United States.

Illegals are absolutely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States or whatever respective state they reside in, and the constitution absolutely applies to them. If they commit felonies or misdemeanors outside of their "illegalness" then they are arrested and tried (and deported) like anyone else.

Until they're located they're not within the jurisdiction actually. You can't have jurisdiction over somebody that does not exist as far as you're aware. This is why they're not entitled to the same protections they do not get the same rights that we have and I'm okay with that. We shouldn't be wasting valuable money and time on deportation hearings for people that have no business being here they can simply leave.

It boils down to can you produce a valid visa, no well then your gone. This isn't complicated

 

[GodisanAtheist]

Until they're located they're not within the jurisdiction actually. You can't have jurisdiction over somebody that does not exist as far as you're aware. This is why they're not entitled to the same protections they do not get the same rights that we have and I'm okay with that. We shouldn't be wasting valuable money and time on deportation hearings for people that have no business being here they can simply leave.

It boils down to can you produce a valid visa, no well then your gone. This isn't complicated

- "Schrodinger's Illegals"

 

[axiomatic13]

- "Schrodinger's Illegals"

Exactly!