Mayor-elect calls monitoring of volunteer court watchers ‘deeply troubling’ as FBI and NYPD face scrutiny over Signal chat infiltration
Surveillance Scandal Emerges Days After Trump Meeting
Just days after his surprisingly cordial White House meeting with President Trump, Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani confronted a surveillance controversy that threatens to define his administration’s approach to policing and immigrant rights. On Monday, Mamdani described newly disclosed reports that the FBI and NYPD monitored a private group chat used by volunteers observing the city’s immigration courts as “deeply troubling,” vowing his incoming administration would conduct a thorough review.
The Guardian initially reported last week that the FBI monitored immigrant-rights activists by accessing a “courtwatch” Signal group, which organizes volunteers who observe public hearings at three federal immigration courts in NYC. A two-page “joint situational information report” from the FBI and NYPD dated August 28, obtained by The Guardian, quoted from the encrypted messaging app Signal and characterized the court watchers as “anarchist violent extremist actors.”
The CITY first confirmed NYPD involvement in the operation. Despite Signal being end-to-end encrypted, the FBI stated it obtained messages through a “sensitive source with excellent access,” implying someone within the chat was sharing information–either a law enforcement infiltrator or an informant among the volunteer activists.
NYPD Distances Itself, Cites Handschu Review
In a statement to amNewYork, an NYPD spokesperson on Monday distanced the department from the joint report, saying it is not an NYPD document. The department said it relates to a broader counterterrorism investigation into a range of potential criminal activities, including weapons training, violence against law enforcement, property damage, and discussions about bomb-making.
The NYPD added that the report has been reviewed by an external civilian representative under a standing court order that created the 10-member NYPD Handschu Committee. The committee, which includes nine NYPD officials and a civilian representative, oversees the opening, extension, and closure of investigations into political activity, including terrorism. The framework emerged from federal lawsuits alleging the department improperly investigated the Muslim community.
The civilian representative, currently attorney Muhammad Faridi, serves a five-year term and can report potential abuses to the NYPD commissioner and the federal judge overseeing the Handschu case. Faridi, appointed by Mayor Adams in 2023, told The City Friday that he had reviewed NYPD records, saying the surveillance referred to one subject and concluded that the inquiry meets Handschu Committee guidelines.
However, the characterization of volunteer court observers as “anarchist violent extremist actors” raises questions about whether the Handschu oversight process adequately protects First Amendment activities. Civil liberties advocates argue that labeling citizens who observe public court proceedings as extremists chills democratic participation and stretches counterterrorism authorities beyond their intended scope.
Court Watchers Play Critical Role During Trump Crackdown
When asked about the NYPD’s involvement during Monday’s announcement of his transition team in Central Park, Mamdani said it was “deeply troubling” and “that’s something that we’re going to look into.” Speaking on the important role court observers have played during the Trump administration’s ongoing immigration crackdown, Mamdani recalled a conversation with a Brooklyn pastor on the campaign trail who spoke of an immigrant they had accompanied to a hearing.
“Part of the reason that she was able to go home that day is because of the court watchers who were there,” Mamdani said. The mayor-elect told reporters that the NYPD having any involvement in spying on court watchers is not something that will be part of his administration and “something that we follow up on.”
For months, amNewYork has been reporting on volunteer court observers who accompany immigrants to their required ICE check-in appointments on the fifth floor of 26 Federal Plaza, where they monitor and document what they believe are increasing detainments. The volunteers say ICE is increasingly arresting individuals there, sometimes before they even reach their scheduled appointments, and have stressed that these moments happen out of sight of journalists and lawyers.
The presence of court watchers serves multiple functions. Their documentation creates a record of ICE practices, their presence can deter aggressive enforcement tactics, and their willingness to serve as witnesses provides immigrants facing proceedings with moral support and accountability. In an environment where immigrants fear detention and deportation, volunteer observers represent community solidarity and democratic oversight of federal enforcement.
Sanctuary Laws and the Limits of Cooperation
Responding to further questions about federal immigration enforcement, Mamdani said New York’s sanctuary laws already allow cooperation with federal authorities for a narrow list of serious crimes, but he criticized ICE for focusing enforcement on children and immigrants whose only offense is being present in the city.
“What I said to the president is that New York City sanctuary laws have a provision within them that allows the city to work with the federal government for a specific set of serious crimes, and that has been the law for decades here in New York City,” said Mamdani. “What’s giving so many New Yorkers, including myself, a deep amount of concern is that the focus of ICE’s immigration efforts has not been on those serious crimes. They have, in fact, been on children as young as six years old, being detained and deported. They have been on New Yorkers whose crime seems to just be being here in New York City.”
The comments reflect the tightrope Mamdani must walk as he enters office. During his Friday meeting with President Trump, Mamdani sought assurances that the federal government wouldn’t send troops to New York or cut federal funding–threats Trump made during the campaign. While both men described the meeting as productive, Mamdani’s careful phrasing suggested no ironclad guarantees were secured.
The surveillance scandal complicates that relationship. Mamdani committed to public safety for all New Yorkers during the campaign, but he also promised to strengthen sanctuary protections and resist federal overreach. The NYPD’s collaboration with the FBI in monitoring immigrant rights activists suggests that local law enforcement may prioritize federal partnership over protecting First Amendment activities–precisely what Mamdani campaigned against.
Implications for Mamdani’s Community Safety Vision
The mayor-elect added that his commitment to public safety is to keep all New Yorkers safe, and “that’s where we have a difference of opinion” with the Trump administration’s approach. The statement hints at fundamental tensions between Mamdani’s vision for a new Department of Community Safety and traditional policing models that prioritize federal cooperation even when it conflicts with local values.
Mamdani’s transition includes a Community Safety Committee featuring both former NYPD Chief Rodney K. Harrison and police abolition scholar Alex Vitale–a pairing that suggests the incoming administration intends to grapple seriously with competing visions of public safety. The surveillance scandal provides an early test case for how that debate will unfold.
Civil liberties organizations have long warned about mission creep in counterterrorism investigations, where broad authorities justified by national security concerns get applied to domestic political activity. The characterization of volunteer court watchers as “anarchist violent extremist actors” based on their participation in an encrypted group chat represents exactly the kind of overreach that erodes trust between communities and law enforcement.
The Handschu Framework Under Scrutiny
The Handschu guidelines were supposed to prevent precisely this type of surveillance. Named for a 1971 lawsuit, Handschu v. Special Services Division established rules limiting NYPD investigations of political and religious activity after the department was found to have improperly spied on activists. The consent decree requires that investigations into First Amendment activities meet specific standards and receive civilian oversight.
That civilian representative Muhammad Faridi approved the surveillance after reviewing records suggests either the Handschu framework has been stretched beyond recognition or court watching has been redefined as terrorism-adjacent activity warranting extraordinary scrutiny. Both possibilities should concern New Yorkers who value civil liberties.
The surveillance also raises technical questions. Signal’s end-to-end encryption means messages can only be read on the devices of chat participants. For the FBI to quote from the group chat, someone with access must have provided the messages. Whether that person was an infiltrator, an informant, or a cooperating witness matters enormously for understanding how law enforcement approaches political organizing.
Mamdani’s Path Forward
Mamdani’s promise to investigate represents more than damage control–it signals his administration’s priorities. By calling the surveillance “deeply troubling” and vowing to ensure it doesn’t happen under his watch, Mamdani sides with civil libertarians over law enforcement officials who argue broad surveillance powers are necessary for public safety.
The incoming mayor faces a choice about NYPD leadership and culture. Will he appoint a police commissioner who views immigrant rights activists as potential extremists requiring surveillance? Or will he choose someone who understands that monitoring people exercising their First Amendment rights corrodes the community trust necessary for effective policing?
His administration will also need to clarify expectations for NYPD cooperation with federal agencies. The FBI’s involvement in monitoring court watchers suggests federal authorities are using local police to gather intelligence on activities that, while politically contentious, are fundamentally legal and constitutionally protected. Mamdani can establish clear guidelines limiting such collaboration, but doing so may strain relationships with federal law enforcement at a time when his administration needs federal cooperation on other priorities.
The controversy arrives at a sensitive moment. Mamdani is working to staff his administration with 70,000 applications flooding his hiring portal. His transition committees are developing policy frameworks for implementing campaign promises. And he’s attempting to maintain a working relationship with a Trump administration that has threatened to withhold federal funding and send troops to New York.
Into that delicate environment comes evidence that the city’s police department collaborated with federal agents to monitor volunteers whose only “crime” was observing public immigration court proceedings and documenting potential rights violations. For a mayor-elect who promised to strengthen sanctuary protections and reimagine public safety, it’s an early test of whether campaign rhetoric will translate into governance reality.
The surveillance scandal reminds us that changing municipal government requires more than electing progressive candidates–it requires transforming institutional cultures that have operated certain ways for decades. Whether Mamdani can accomplish that transformation while maintaining the coalitions necessary to govern effectively will define his mayoralty from its very first days.
