Social Security workers are required to turn over appointment details to ICE

workers in The Social Security Administration was asked to share information about in-person appointments with Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, WIRED has learned.

“If ICE comes in and asks if someone has an appointment coming up, we’ll tell them the date and time,” says an employee with direct knowledge of the directive. They spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation.

While the majority of appointments with SSA are made by phone, some appointments are still made in person. This applies to people who are deaf or hard of hearing and need a sign language interpreter, or if someone needs to change their direct deposit information. Noncitizens are also required to appear in person to review continued benefit eligibility.

Social Security numbers are issued to US citizens and also to foreign students and people who are legally permitted to live and work in the country. In some cases, when a child or dependent is a citizen and the responsible family member is not, that person may need to accompany the child or dependent to visit the office.

The information-sharing order, which was recently sent verbally to staff at some SSA offices, marks a new era of cooperation between SSA and the Department of Homeland Security, ICE’s parent agency.

The Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security did not respond to requests for comment.

The SSA shared data with ICE during much of President Donald Trump’s second term. In April, WIRED reported that the Trump administration was collecting sensitive data from across the government, including from the Social Security Administration, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Internal Revenue Service. By November, WIRED learned that the Social Security Agency had made the arrangements official and updated a public notice stating that the agency was sharing “citizenship and immigration information” with the Department of Homeland Security. “It was shockingly clear that there was an interest in accessing immigration data online [the] “The Trump administration,” a former SSA official told WIRED. The official spoke on condition of anonymity due to fears of retaliation.

This data sharing has not been without controversy: Last week, a district judge in Massachusetts ruled that the IRS and Social Security Administration cannot share taxpayer data with the Department of Homeland Security or Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“You see private Social Security becoming an extension of Homeland Security,” says Leland Dodek, former acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration.

Dodek says the directive to share details about in-person appointments would be “highly unusual,” especially since the Social Security Administration is intended to be a “safe space” for people to come to, regardless of immigration status. “If someone has a benefit, Social Security is there for them and no harm will happen to them,” he says. Dodik says cooperating with ICE in this way “reduces the value of SSA to the public. Why should the public trust SSA anymore?”

Questions about how SSA workers communicate with the public have persisted throughout Trump’s first term. As part of its incursion into the federal government, the so-called Department of Government Efficiency sought to end telephone services provided by the Social Security Administration, but reversed the decision after public backlash.

The SSA works with law enforcement officials on investigations typically related to fraud or identity theft. It has publicly disclosed data-sharing agreements with DHS, but it does not appear that anyone’s time or schedule is included in those arrangements.

Historically, the only time someone would be arrested at an SSA office is if the person threatened the agency or employees, Dodek says. “Anything that would normally involve arresting someone in an office or something like that, would have been communicated through the office director and to a DHS representative as part of that,” Dodek says. “On multiple occasions, I’ve had to hand over information to law enforcement, but there’s a process and paperwork and multiple people’s signatures. This seems to be telling us to ignore this policy without actually updating it. It’s really troubling.”