Newly disclosed internal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) files reveal that undercover federal agents infiltrated activist groups opposing Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) operations in Minnesota. The documents, disclosed in federal court and reviewed by the Guardian, detail how agents posed as concerned community members to gather intelligence.

One agent, using the username “peanutbutterjelly” in Signal chats, kept records of conversations, screenshotting discussions about protest plans and offering assistance with fundraising and volunteer recruitment. Another agent took photos at demonstrations and planning meetings, capturing images of protesters in costumes, anti-ICE messages, and various protest activities.

Additional DHS agents reportedly followed protesters during their daily routines, including leaving their homes and attending church. The undercover agent also participated in a virtual “ICE watch” training on December 3, where community members discussed monitoring ICE officers.

The undercover officer described a one-on-one conversation with an activist, offering supplies for demonstrations and stating, “I told him that I work construction and I could do things with building whatever they need.” The activist accepted the agent’s phone number, and the agent said he acknowledged the peaceful nature of the protests while offering to help with “stuff that’s more direct.”

Photos taken by the agent included a march with a demonstrator wearing a “peaceful observer don’t shoot” vest, graffiti saying “KILL ICE,” notes on a socialist group’s calisthenics class, brass musicians protesting ICE, and a “Defend our democracy” flag.

These records were released amid the Department of Justice’s ongoing prosecution of 15 Minneapolis protesters accused of participating in a “conspiracy” to “impede” ICE operations. When questioned about the investigations, a DHS spokesperson stated that Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the branch conducting the inquiries, “does not comment on the existence or status of specific on-going investigations, nor on investigative methods.”