When 'Homeland Security' Becomes Homeland Insecurity
CASE A: The 'Threat' at the Super Bowl In 2021, The Hill reported on a U.S. Congressman joining an anti-ICE protest near a Super Bowl event. The narrative presented is one of elected officials challenging specific government agencies over their perceived overreach. The target of the protest, ICE, falls under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), an agency created in the wake of the September
11, 2001, attacks. The 'threat' ICE was addressing was undocumented immigrants, framed within a national security context, especially at a high-profile event like the Super Bowl. The argument from protesters and the Congressman was simple: ICE operations, particularly those involving arrests and deportations, often infringe on human rights and due process, especially when conducted aggressively in
spaces like public gatherings. The presence of DHS components at non-border events, like a Super Bowl, suggests a blurring of lines between national security and domestic policing, potentially targeting a broad segment of the population, not just those designated as high-risk. CASE B: The Historical Precedent of 'Internal Security' This isn't a new phenomenon. The expansion of policing and
surveillance powers in the name of 'security' has a long, documented history in the United States. Consider the FBI's COINTELPRO operations from 1956 to 1971, which targeted civil rights leaders and anti-war activists, labeling them as 'subversives' and 'threats to national security' (Church Committee, 1975). These operations, initially justified by concerns about foreign communist influence, were