Records on Militia Interactions (2017–2021, 2025–Present) Including Memos, Communications, and Substation Reports

Subject: FOIA Request for U.S. Border Patrol Records on Militia Interactions (2017–2021, 2025–Present) Including Memos, Communications, and Substation Reports

Jordan Lassiter
Investigative Journalist
March 20, 2025

FOIA Officer
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20229
Email: CBPFOIA@dhs.gov
Fax: (202) 325-1400

URGENT – LEGALLY BINDING NOTICE AND STRICT COMPLIANCE REQUIRED

This document constitutes a formal, binding request for records under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, and the applicable regulations (28 C.F.R. Part 16). Failure to comply fully with the requirements set forth herein—including a complete search, proper preservation, and production of all responsive records—will be subject to judicial review, may be used as evidence of bad faith, and may result in immediate legal action.

I. RECORDS SUBJECT TO REQUEST

I hereby request full access to and copies of all records—without omission—that pertain to any communications, directives, or cooperative activities between U.S. Border Patrol personnel (or its representatives) and militia groups or their known leaders/members, including, but not limited to:

Arizona Border Recon (Tim Foley)
Minuteman Civil Defense Corps
United Constitutional Patriots
Veterans on Patrol

This request includes all records (such as emails, text messages, instant messages, internal memos, working notes, drafts, briefing documents, meeting minutes, contact logs, call logs, and any other communications, along with associated metadata and attachments) regarding any interaction or coordination with the above entities during the following periods:

Trump Administration – First Term: January 20, 2017 to January 20, 2021
Trump Administration – Second Term: January 20, 2025 to the present

II. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED RECORDS

A. Communications and Directives

Internal Communications: All electronic or paper communications—including emails, text messages, instant messages, and internal memos (including working notes, drafts, and annotations)—exchanged among U.S. Border Patrol officials regarding any contact, coordination, or cooperation with the specified militia groups or their representatives.
External Communications: All communications (including attachments and metadata) exchanged between U.S. Border Patrol personnel and any representatives, intermediaries, or external advisors of the identified militia groups.
Interagency Communications: All communications (including memos, drafts, and internal notes) exchanged between U.S. Border Patrol personnel and other federal agencies (e.g., DHS, FBI, ICE) concerning coordination or inquiries into activities involving the specified militia groups.

B. Policy, Decision-Making, and Operational Documents

Policy Documents/Directives: All finalized and draft policies, guidelines, training materials, standard operating procedures (SOPs), and directives related to the coordination or cooperation with militia groups.
Decision-Making Records: All documents evidencing the decision-making process—including memos, meeting agendas, minutes, transcripts, internal reports, working notes, calendars, and briefing materials—that reference any interactions with the above groups.
Operational Records: Any action plans, progress reports, resource allocation documents, technical specifications, and records of any coordinated operations or intelligence-sharing activities—including all associated internal memos and supporting working documents—between Border Patrol and militia representatives.

III. CUSTODIANS, SEARCH SYSTEMS, AND TERMS

A. Custodians:

Include all records maintained or in the possession of U.S. Border Patrol officials, such as Commanding Officers, Supervisory Personnel, FOIA Officers, Records Management Officers, Field Office Administrators, and any personnel directly involved in the creation, storage, or dissemination of the requested records.

B. Search Systems:

The search must cover all electronic and paper systems, including but not limited to:

Electronic mail systems (e.g., Microsoft 365, Enterprise Vault)
Document management systems (e.g., OpenText, iManage/WorkSite)
FOIA processing systems (e.g., FOIAonline, FOIA Xpress)
Any legacy systems or locally maintained databases or repositories containing relevant records

C. Search Terms:

At a minimum, employ search queries including:

“Arizona Border Recon” OR “Tim Foley”
“Minuteman Civil Defense Corps”
“United Constitutional Patriots”
“Veterans on Patrol”
“militia” AND (“contact” OR “communication” OR “cooperation”)
“U.S. Border Patrol” AND (“militia” OR “paramilitary”)
Date range terms reflecting “2017”, “2018”, “2019”, “2020”, “2025”, and other pertinent dates
The exact syntax, Boolean operators, and any modifications applied in each search must be documented and provided.

IV. LEGAL BASIS AND PRECEDENT
This request is made pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552 and is supported by the following legal authorities and judicial precedents, which mandate exhaustive and complete searches for all relevant documents:

Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749 (1989)
Milner v. Department of Navy, 562 U.S. 562 (2011)
OpenTheGovernment v. Department of Justice, 18-cv-1038 (D.D.C. May 17, 2018)
Public Citizen v. Department of Justice, 491 U.S. 440 (1989)
Truitt v. Department of State, 897 F.2d 540, 542 (D.C. Cir. 1990)
In addition, binding regulations under 28 C.F.R. Part 16 require that searches be “reasonably calculated to uncover all relevant documents.”

V. EXPEDITED PROCESSING REQUEST

I request expedited processing under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(v)(II) and 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(e) on the following grounds:

Urgency in Informing the Public: The requested records are central to investigations into potential infringements on constitutional rights and may reveal significant government overreach.
Historical and Ongoing Significance: The records span multiple administrations and are essential for determining whether current policies continue or depart from prior practices.
Media and Legal Implications: Timely disclosure is critical to ensure informed public debate and to enable judicial review if the records are improperly withheld.

VI. FEE WAIVER REQUEST

I request a full waiver of all fees associated with the processing of this request pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii) and 28 C.F.R. § 16.10(k) because:

The disclosure of these records is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to public understanding of governmental operations and potential constitutional violations.
This request is not made for any commercial purpose.
Precedents, including Cause of Action v. Federal Trade Commission, 799 F.3d 1108 (D.C. Cir. 2015) and Carney v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 19 F.3d 807, 814 (2d Cir. 1994), support fee waivers for requests that enhance governmental transparency.
If fees are expected to exceed $100, please contact me prior to proceeding further.

VII. FORMAT OF PRODUCTION

Records should be produced in their native electronic format, with complete metadata intact:

Emails: In formats such as .MSG or .EML with full headers, metadata, attachments, and any embedded content.
Documents: In original file formats (e.g., .DOCX, .XLSX, .PDF) with intact metadata.
Structured Data: In .CSV or .XML format, including accompanying data dictionaries.
Paper Records: High-resolution (minimum 300 dpi) color scans in PDF format.

VIII. PRESERVATION OF RECORDS

I require that all potentially responsive records be immediately preserved. This includes ensuring that all electronic files retain their original metadata and that no automated deletion or archival processes alter or destroy the relevant records.

IX. VAUGHN INDEX REQUIREMENTS

If any portion of the responsive records is withheld or redacted, I request a complete Vaughn index that:

Lists each document withheld or redacted with specificity.
Identifies the exact statutory exemption(s) claimed.
Provides a detailed explanation of how each exemption justifies the withholding, including an analysis of the potential harm from disclosure.
Discloses any segregable portions that can be released.

X. ADMINISTRATIVE TRACKING AND SEARCH DOCUMENTATION

In compliance with 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i) and relevant case law, please include with your response:

The tracking number assigned to this request.
The name(s) of the FOIA personnel responsible for processing this request.
A detailed description of the search methodology employed, including all systems, databases, repositories, and local storage locations searched.
The exact search terms used (including Boolean operators and any modifications).
Date ranges for each search.
Documentation of personnel involved and the time spent on each search.
Copies or summaries of search logs, including timestamps and result counts.
Certification by the designated Information Management Officer that all potentially responsive records were searched.

XI. RIGHT TO APPEAL AND JUDICIAL REVIEW

I expressly reserve my right to appeal any adverse determination regarding this request, including:

Denials of expedited processing or fee waivers.
Insufficient or inadequate searches.
Withholdings or redactions based on FOIA exemptions.
Any such determination shall be subject to immediate judicial review as provided under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E) and other applicable law.

XII. PREVIOUS EVIDENCE OF INTERACTION

There is extensive, independently documented evidence of interactions between U.S. Border Patrol personnel and militia groups. Specifically:

Southern Poverty Law Center Report: In Plain Sight: Uncovering Border Patrol’s Relationship with Far-Right Militias at the Southern Border (​
SPLCENTER.ORG
) details multiple instances of such interactions in Arizona.
WIRED Report: Border Militias Prepare to Assist With Donald Trump’s Mass Deportation Plans (​
WIRED.COM
) describes contacts between militia groups like Arizona Border Recon and federal officials.
Additional Investigative Reports: Articles from the Los Angeles Times and TIME (​
LATIMES.COM
;
TIME.COM
) corroborate historical and ongoing patterns of informal cooperation or tacit approval between Border Patrol personnel, local law enforcement, and vigilante groups.
These independent sources establish a clear pattern of interaction that underscores the public interest in obtaining full disclosure of the requested records.

XIII. SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTATION AND SUBSTATION RECORDS

In addition to the records explicitly described above, please produce any supplementary or “substation” records that are relevant to the processing of this request. This includes, but is not limited to:

Additional memos, internal correspondence, briefing materials, or working documents not otherwise specifically identified herein that discuss or reference the search process, procedures, or any additional documentation related to interactions between U.S. Border Patrol and the specified militia groups.
All administrative reports, summaries, or analyses prepared by FOIA or records management personnel that elucidate the methodology, limitations, or findings related to the search for responsive records.
Any documentation from U.S. Customs and Border Protection substations located in Texas, Arizona, or any other relevant border states—including records, communications, internal memos, and operational reports—that pertain to interactions or cooperation with the aforementioned militia groups or their representatives.
Any records maintained at regional or substation offices that support the production of records responsive to this request.
Please confirm receipt of this request and provide a tracking number within five (5) working days, as required under FOIA. If any portion of this request is unclear or if additional information is required, please contact me immediately. I further request that no delay tactics or improper denials be employed.

Thank you for your prompt, full, and legally compliant disclosure of these records.

Respectfully,

Jordan Lassiter
Investigative Journalist

Subject: FOIA Appeal – Unlawful Closure and Inadequate Search for Request on U.S. Border Patrol and Militia Interactions

To: FOIA Appeals Officer
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20229
Email: CBPFOIA@dhs.gov
Fax: (202) 325-1400

From:
Jordan Lassiter
Investigative Journalist
March 23, 2025

RE: Appeal of Arbitrary Closure and Failure to Conduct Proper Search (FOIA Request: Records on U.S. Border Patrol and Militia Interactions 2017–2021, 2025–Present)

I. INTRODUCTION

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i), I formally appeal the arbitrary closure and inadequate processing of my FOIA request seeking records concerning communications, memos, and reports related to U.S. Border Patrol’s interactions with militia groups from 2017–2021 and 2025–present.

CBP has failed to conduct a reasonable search for responsive records, failed to issue a proper determination, and arbitrarily closed my request without adequate justification. This constitutes a clear violation of FOIA’s statutory mandates, as established in Truitt v. Department of State, 897 F.2d 540, 542 (D.C. Cir. 1990), which requires agencies to conduct searches “reasonably calculated to uncover all relevant documents.”

II. BASIS FOR APPEAL

A. Failure to Conduct an Adequate Search

CBP has not demonstrated that it undertook a search that meets FOIA’s standards, nor has it provided the search methodologies, custodians, systems searched, or search terms used. The agency is legally required to document these details (OpenTheGovernment v. Department of Justice, 18-cv-1038 (D.D.C. May 17, 2018)), and its failure to do so suggests an inadequate or nonexistent search.

B. Unlawful Closure Without a Proper Determination

FOIA requires agencies to provide a written determination that includes the scope of the search and an explanation for any records withheld or redacted. The arbitrary closure of my request without a Vaughn Index, a justification for any exemptions, or a record of the search methodology violates Milner v. Department of Navy, 562 U.S. 562 (2011), and Public Citizen v. Department of Justice, 491 U.S. 440 (1989).

C. Failure to Address Request Scope and Mandatory Custodian Searches

I specifically outlined required search parameters, including:
• Custodians: Commanding Officers, FOIA Officers, Field Office Administrators, and others involved in record creation or storage.
• Systems: Email servers (Microsoft 365, Enterprise Vault), document repositories (OpenText, iManage), FOIA processing systems (FOIAonline, FOIA Xpress), and relevant databases.
• Search Terms: “Arizona Border Recon,” “Minuteman Civil Defense Corps,” “United Constitutional Patriots,” “Veterans on Patrol,” and other related terms.

CBP has not addressed whether these required elements were searched, violating FOIA’s mandate for a complete and reasonable effort.

III. REQUESTED REMEDIES
1. Immediate Reopening of My FOIA Request
CBP must properly reopen and process my request instead of arbitrarily closing it without fulfilling its obligations under FOIA.
2. A Complete and Adequate Search
CBP must conduct a full search, including all electronic systems, paper records, emails, and other documentation, and provide a detailed explanation of search methodologies.
3. A Legally Compliant Determination with Vaughn Index (if applicable)
If any records are withheld, CBP must provide a Vaughn Index detailing each document withheld, the exemptions applied, and a justification for each exemption.
4. Immediate Production of Responsive Records
Given the strong public interest in government interactions with militia groups, I request that all non-exempt records be released as soon as possible.
5. Compliance with FOIA’s Statutory Timeframe
CBP must issue a proper response within 20 working days per 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(ii).

IV. CONCLUSION

CBP’s arbitrary closure and failure to conduct an adequate search violate FOIA’s legal requirements. I request immediate corrective action, including reopening the request, performing a proper search, and providing responsive records. Failure to comply may result in legal action to compel compliance.

Please confirm receipt of this appeal and provide a response within the statutory timeframe.

Sincerely,
Jordan Lassiter
Investigative Journalist

Please find attached a fee waiver for your last point

Attachment