Google Workers Urge Company to Cut Ties With ICE and CBP * Science and Technology Times

Nearly a thousand Google employees have signed an open letter calling on the company to end its partnerships with U.S. immigration enforcement agencies.
The workers cite recent incidents of violence and express concern about Google’s role in supporting surveillance technologies.
Their demands add to growing pressure on major tech firms to clarify their involvement in federal immigration operations.

Employees Call for Transparency and Divestment

Close to a thousand Google workers have signed an open letter urging the company to sever its relationships with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The letter references recent ICE‑related killings and states that employees are “appalled” and “horrified” by the company’s involvement in technologies used by these agencies. It argues that Google’s tools contribute to surveillance and enforcement practices that workers find ethically unacceptable. The signatories call on leadership to disclose all contracts and collaborations with ICE and CBP.

The letter specifically cites Google Cloud’s support for CBP surveillance systems and its role in powering Palantir’s ImmigrationOS platform, which is used by ICE. It also claims that Google’s generative AI tools are being used by CBP. Another point of concern is the allegation that the Google Play Store has blocked apps designed to track ICE activity. These examples are presented as evidence that Google’s technology is intertwined with federal immigration operations.

Employees quote a January social media post from Google Chief Scientist Jeff Dean, who wrote about the responsibility to speak up in the face of troubling events. They argue that this sentiment should apply to the company’s own partnerships. The letter frames the issue as both an ethical and policy matter, urging leadership to take a clear stance. Workers say they expect transparency about where the company draws the line in government collaborations.

Workers Demand Safety Measures and Internal Dialogue

Beyond divestment, the letter calls for protections for employees who may feel unsafe due to ICE’s activities. Workers request an emergency internal Q&A session focused on Google’s contracts with the Department of Homeland Security and military agencies. They also ask for safety measures such as flexible remote‑work options and immigration support for affected staff. These steps, they argue, would help ensure that employees are not put at risk by the company’s partnerships.

The letter emphasizes that many workers feel personally threatened by ICE’s actions. It states that Google must acknowledge these concerns and take responsibility for the environment its partnerships create. Employees argue that the company’s current trajectory places them in a difficult ethical position. They describe themselves as “workers of conscience” who want their labor to align with their values.

The message also warns that Google risks becoming part of a broader pattern of private companies profiting from state violence. Workers say they want to prevent the company from following this path. They call for collective action within the Google community to push leadership toward change. The letter frames this moment as an opportunity to reassess the company’s role in government contracting.

Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The lack of a public statement has left employees waiting for clarity. Their demands reflect a growing expectation that tech companies address the ethical implications of their government partnerships. The issue continues to generate debate across the industry.

Part of a Larger Movement Across the Tech Sector

The Google letter is not an isolated event. Just two weeks earlier, employees from Amazon, Spotify, Meta and other major tech firms issued a similar statement calling for ICE to be removed from their cities. These actions reflect a broader trend of workers pushing their employers to take public positions on immigration enforcement. Many employees argue that tech companies should not contribute to systems they view as harmful.

The pressure comes at a time when federal immigration policies remain a contentious issue. Tech firms have increasingly become involved in providing infrastructure and analytics tools to government agencies. This involvement has raised questions about the ethical responsibilities of companies whose technologies can be used for surveillance or enforcement. Worker activism has become a key force shaping how these issues are discussed.

Employee letters like this one highlight the growing divide between corporate strategies and worker expectations. Many tech workers want their companies to adopt clearer ethical guidelines for government partnerships. Others seek more transparency about how their work is used. These concerns are likely to continue influencing internal debates within major tech firms.

The situation also underscores the role of employee activism in shaping corporate policy. As workers become more vocal, companies may face increasing pressure to justify or reconsider their government contracts. The Google letter adds another example to a growing list of employee‑driven efforts to influence the direction of the tech industry.