I misunderstood the title. I thought that ICE and CBP had somehow taken to retaliating against ACLU for their inquiries about Stingrays, that the ACLU had someh

I misunderstood the title. I thought that ICE and CBP had somehow taken to retaliating against ACLU for their inquiries about Stingrays, that the ACLU had somehow found out about this and was counter-retaliating with a lawsuit. Fortunately, nothing so dramatic is happening here; their FOIA requests having been stonewalled, and they're taking to the courts to try to force compliance with FOIA. Good on them. I hope they succeed. I could do without some of the phrasing of the press release though, it comes across as needlessly inflammatory, deliberately written to paint ICE and CBP as some sort of anti-immigration evil league of evil. As an example, take the scare quotes around the term "unlawful-reentry". Here, I use the quotes to mark the word as a word under discussion, apart from the meaning the sentence would have were it not quoted. There, the only common use of quotes that makes sense to me is to mark the use as sarcastic. Sarcasm isn't helpful. If you enter a country without going through a port of entry, that's unlawful entry. If you go back to a country without going through a port of entry, that's unlawfully reentry. That holds true at every national border on this planet, and isn't some anti-immigrant invention of ICE or CBP. This sort of thing makes me sad, because that kind of sarcasm and disingenuousness makes it easier for people and groups who actually are actively opposed to rights for various other groups to paint the ACLU as acting in bad faith. Don't give your enemies free ammunition. Stick to the facts, and leave the emotionally inflammatory remarks for personal social media accounts.