They Bought a Hat at REI. Now, ICE Is Looking for Them

Outdoor retail co-op REI has found itself at the center of a court case surrounding a January anti-ICE protest at a Minnesota church. New court filings allege that Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) subpoenaed the outdoor retailer in March for the transaction records of everyone in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area who purchased a particular dark green beanie from the brand Coal from January 1, 2024 onward.

“The summons requested the dates and locations of purchases, buyer identities and contact information, payment type, and complete credit- or debit-card numbers,” according to the new filings. It was one of dozens of subpoenas issued by ICE as part of a broad investigation into protesters and journalists, including former CNN host Don Lemon, who entered a St. Paul church during an anti-ICE demonstration in early 2026. 

What Federal Investigators Are Demanding

The REI summons was one of 92 subpoenas issued in an effort to identify individuals associated with the demonstration — some, like the REI one, were broad in scope and could identify previously unknown participants, while others targeted specific defendants.

Some companies complied: T-Mobile, without notifying journalist Georgia Fort, gave HSI six months of Fort’s call records, text metadata, and transmission timestamps. Some companies, such as Google and YouTube, formally rejected HSI’s demands for account details, viewing histories, and IP records connected to reporters covering the event.

The results of some demands are still unknown. An unnamed commercial airline received a request for one of the defendants’ past travel records, as well as a lookout notification for future travel. Venmo received a summons for the transaction histories of labor and advocacy organizations that are not facing any criminal charges. 

For its part, REI has not publicly confirmed or denied whether it complied with the summons.

HSI used Section 1509 of the United States Code, which was originally designed for official customs audits of imported cargo and investigations dealing with commercial border fraud, to issue the subpoenas. Summonses issued under this statute do not require a judge’s approval.

Defense lawyers argue that this use of the statute is unlawful on the basis that it is only meant to be used in cases involving cross-border commerce. Lawyers for the Department of Homeland Security have argued in a separate court filing that the use of Section 1509 was lawful because the case involved a potential attempted assault on a law enforcement officer (the pastor at the church in this case was also an ICE official).

Where Does the Case Go From Here?

A legal fight over this evidence is now unfolding. Counsel representing the 39 defendants filed motions to suppress all the evidence gathered through Section 1509 and to dismiss the indictment entirely due to government overreach.

Regardless of the outcome, court rulings provide relief only to indicted defendants who can challenge evidence during criminal proceedings. Everyday consumers may never even know their information has been turned over in a case like this.