A federal judge has issued a preliminary injunction against the Department of Homeland Security, ruling that its warning notice to Rochester resident David Streever likely violated his First Amendment right to free speech.

In his ruling, Judge Rudolph Contreras of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia wrote that “the threat of (an) investigation or prosecution looms over him like the sword of Damocles, and he is forced to self-censor under that threat.”

The case stems from a Jan. 26, 2026, email Streever sent to Todd Lyons, then acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which is part of DHS. Streever wrote the email to express his outrage at the deaths of two Minnesotans shot by ICE officers.

“You are a monstrous human being,” Streever’s email began. He compared Lyons to Reinhard Heydrich, one of the architects of the Nazis’ “Final Solution,” and declared “you will be a sad, despised man who eats himself alive with shame at your own pathetic weakness.”

In June, ICE agents came to David Streever’s home to deliver a notice, threatening prosecution if he didn’t discontinue his criticism of the agency.

For five months, Streever received no response. But in June, two ICE agents came to his home and gave his wife the warning notice for Streever that stated at the top, “YOU MAY BE IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW.” The notice threatened prosecution if he did not discontinue his criticism of ICE.

In July, Streever—represented by attorneys from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression—filed suit against DHS for violating his First Amendment rights to criticize and petition government officials. 

David Streever

“ICE knowingly pursued an American citizen for criticizing his government—speech that is at the heart of the First Amendment,” says FIRE senior attorney Adam Steinbaugh. “Ominous letters warning people their speech might land them in prison are meant to coerce people into silence, and that’s not how the First Amendment works.”

“Although Mr. Streever’s email was not kind, and may not have been particularly productive, it was a far cry from a ‘true threat of violence’ sufficient for the email to shed its First Amendment protections,” the judge wrote. “The (warning) notice practically shouts that Mr. Streever may be prosecuted if he continues to engage in his political speech.”

In a statement, Streever said: “I’m deeply relieved that the court affirmed what I knew all along: that I am permitted to speak my conscience in the United States of America, including when I criticize government officials. While I wish this ordeal hadn’t happened, hopefully this incident will serve as a reminder that the First Amendment protects us all.”

The preliminary injunction bars the government from relying on the warning notice and Streever’s January email “in future prosecutions and investigative demands” as well as “issuing similar warnings to Mr. Streever that suggest he cannot engage in non-threatening criticism of the government.”

In a court filing, DHS stated that its investigation into Streever’s email had closed on June 30.

Contreras stayed his ruling for two weeks to allow DHS time to appeal, if it opts to do so.

Paul Ericson is Rochester Beacon executive editor.

The Beacon welcomes comments and letters from readers who adhere to our comment policy including use of their full, real name. See “Leave a Reply” below to discuss on this post. Comments of a general nature may be submitted to the Letters page by emailing  [email protected]