Under the first Trump administration in 2020, we saw local, county, and federal law enforcement’s surveillance networks weaponized against Black Lives Matter protesters. These networks targeted immigrants, queer people, and other marginalized communities protesting for the same rights afforded to other Americans whose identities do not threaten the status quo. 

During the same period in Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, law enforcement created a list of people involved in protests. Protesters in Milwaukee, Wauwatosa, and Kenosha reported that their cellphones were seized during arrests, with delays in their return. 

The surveillance and violent repression of Black Lives Matter harkens back to the same weaponization of U.S. government resources against protesters during the Civil Rights Movement.

This Black History Month, we should reflect on who the government considers enemies. The FBI extensively surveilled Martin Luther King Jr. and other civil rights leaders and Black liberation groups like the Black Panthers. 

In the 1960s, the Milwaukee Police Department (MPD) monitored the Milwaukee NAACP Youth Council and its advisor, Father James Groppi, seeking to suppress Black activism in the city. MPD also targeted LGBTQ+ communities, frequently raiding social venues, harassing patrons, and engaging in entrapment tactics.

Historically, the state has used its power to surveil and suppress communities of color, queer communities, and protest groups. The intersection of Black and queer identities made Black queer activists especially vulnerable to state surveillance and violence.

But during the Civil Rights Movement, the surveillance state was technologically limited and dependent upon informants, physical stakeouts, and analog wiretaps.

Today, law enforcement agencies in Milwaukee and across Wisconsin have access to powerful surveillance tools that dramatically expand their capabilities. These include Stingrays (which mimic cell towers to intercept phone data), license plate readers, geofence warrants, predictive policing algorithms, ShotSpotter technology, drones, hacking software, and mass surveillance dragnets.

Imagine if the Jim Crow South had access to these technologies during the Civil Rights Movement—if the federal government had the power to instantly locate and detain members of the Black Panther Party or anti-Vietnam War protesters, or if Chief Harold Breier could have used predictive policing tools to target Black communities in Milwaukee. The ability of law enforcement to crush movements for justice would have been exponentially greater.

There is real concern that marginalized communities including immigrants, abortion seekers and providers, and trans people could become increasingly targeted by government surveillance as the civil rights and liberties landscape changes under the second Trump administration.

This Black History Month, we challenge you to reflect on three things:

1. What groups of people do the government claim are criminals, dissidents, or unpatriotic threats that must be surveilled and suppressed? Sixty years ago, that included Martin Luther King Jr., the Black Panthers, anti-war protesters, and queer rights activists.
2. Privacy is a necessity for protecting democracy and allowing marginalized communities to challenge oppression. Imagine how quickly the government could have crushed dissent in the past if it had access to today’s surveillance tools.
3. Do you trust law enforcement to refrain from using these tools against marginalized communities? Both past and present tell us that this is already happening.

We must demand community control over police surveillance. In Milwaukee, other Wisconsin cities, and across the country, we need ordinances that regulate and restrict law enforcement’s use of surveillance technologies.

The state's power to monitor and suppress marginalized communities has only grown—but so has our ability to resist. The question is, will we fight back before it’s too late?

We have a pivotal election this spring, and on the ballot, you will be asked one binding referendum question about voting rights in Wisconsin. This ballot question would change the Wisconsin Constitution if it passes. The ACLU of Wisconsin opposes this referendum, and we’ll tell you why.

Here’s the question: 

Question 1: “Photographic identification for voting. Shall section 1m of article III of the constitution be created to require that voters present valid photographic identification verifying their identity in order to vote in any election, subject to exceptions which may be established by law?"

Wisconsin’s voter ID law is one of the strictest in the country.

Requiring photo identification that many voters do not have and that many voters cannot easily obtain – particularly voters with disabilities, elderly Wisconsinites, students and first-time voters, low-income and unhoused voters, and Native, Black and Latino voters – disenfranchises eligible voters.

A recent study found that nearly 3 million voting-age U.S. citizens in Wisconsin, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee – states with strict photo ID laws – lacked a driver’s license, and of those, over 1.3 million did not have the identification needed to vote.

Strict photo ID requirements are a solution in search of a problem.

In-person voter fraud is vanishingly rare. A study found that, from 2000 to 2012, there were only 31 credible allegations of voter impersonation – the only type of fraud that photo IDs could prevent – during a period of time in which over 1 billion ballots were cast. That’s 0.0000031%.

Our elections are secure. We should be expanding access to the ballot box, not further limiting it.

ACLU-WI joined over 20 other organizations in opposing this referendum and calling on lawmakers to stop legislating by constitutional amendment as an end-run around the governor’s veto pen.

Vote to preserve our constitution. Vote to protect our right to vote. Vote No.