Law schools across the country use data companies, such as LexisNexus and Westlaw, for their faculty and students to have access to legal data, including case law, opinions, and academic secondary sources. The use of these resources is non-negotiable for most law students. In recent months, though, more law students have brought to light the contracts that Thomson Reuters and RELX plc, the parent companies of Westlaw and LexisNexis, respectively, have with the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). In addition to working with LexisNexis and Westlaw, the parent companies Thomson Reuters and RELX plc have contracts with other notable corporations as well as the government, and Thomson Reuters is also a news and media source. Given the controversial actions taken by ICE in recent years involving surveillance and deportation of immigrants, law students at schools across the country are mobilizing and organizing to persuade their law schools to end their contracts with companies such as Westlaw and LexisNexis so long as they continue their contracts with ICE. 

In recent years, ICE has been systematically tracking down undocumented immigrants, not only at the border but also throughout the country, with the intent of deportation. ICE has significantly increased the number of deportations during the Obama administration, but the number of ICE raids has increased during the Trump administration. ICE only employs about 6,100 officers in their Enforcement and Removal Operations division, and they are attempting to track down over ten million undocumented immigrants that currently live throughout all 50 states in the US. The only possible way that ICE can effectively find the people they are looking for is through the use of big data, meaning large databases of stored information about immigrants in the United States. ICE maintains contracts companies like Thomson Reuters and RELX plc to keep information about immigrants, including where they live, where they work, and their family members, to help them track down undocumented persons. The deportation of undocumented immigrants started to increase under the Obama Administration, but Obama directed ICE to track down those that were seen as potential threats to society. However, since the beginning of Trump’s presidency when he enacted Executive Order 13768 “Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States,” President Trump has instructed ICE to track down and deport those that do not pose a potential criminal threat. Since then, the number of arrests and deportations of undocumented persons has increased substantially. For example, in Trump’s first fourteen months in office, there were 58,010 arrests of immigrants with no criminal record, which was a threefold increase from the previous fourteen months. Companies like Thomson Reuters and RELX plc, the parent companies of Westlaw and LexisNexis, continue to gather data for ICE to make the deliberate surveillance of specific people in immigrant communities possible. 

The Trump administration’s policies that enforces the enabling of inhumane arrests and deportation of thousands of undocumented immigrants pushes current lawyers to address the ethical concerns of using sites like LexisNexis and Westlaw, whose parent companies have contracts worth million of dollars with ICE. Lawyers are at a crossroads on how to confront the situation because the American Bar Association (ABA) does not present specific ethical guidelines associated with legal research vendors, leaving lawyers and firms to address this issue somewhat individually and personally. Immigration law firms are particularly concerned with this issue because they are essentially debating the ethical question of whether their firm should support organizations that are a detriment to their own clients. Although many firms are still wavering on their stance and the best direction to move in this debate, many law school students have formed a strong opinion and are already taking a firm stance. 

Groups of students from many law schools across the country have formed organizations within their universities to take a stand against their university’s contracts with companies like LexisNexis and Westlaw. The use of legal databases is a necessity in law school curricula. Thousands of students feel it is unfair that they are forced to use such companies that go against their strongly held values and ethics. An organization called Law Students Against ICE has formed chapters at various universities with the goal of convincing the parent companies of LexisNexis and Westlaw to end their contracts with ICE as well as encouraging students to ask their professors for alternative legal research companies, such as Casetext, for instance, that do not have contracts with ICE. Students have already posted information and tabled to inform their student bodies about the implications of these multi-million dollar contracts with the companies they are essentially forced to use. An extra push of action occurred on November 14, 2019, the Day of Action, but Law Students Against ICE looks to increase their action in the coming months. 

Harvard Law School has a large chapter of Law Students Against ICE that has been active in organizing efforts to educate the student body about this issue. A first-year student at Harvard Law School and a member of Law Students Against ICE, David Popoola, stated, “I support Law Students Against ICE because I do not support companies who choose to profit from abuses of human rights. I think Law Students Against ICE is doing incredibly important work to try and hold companies accountable for their support of cruel, dehumanizing immigration policies.” Students like David feel strongly about the ethical concern of working with ICE and believe that it is important that those involved in legal academia as well as the rest of the legal sphere are aware of the products they are using. If the broader implications of the contracts with LexisNexis and Westlaw do not align with their political views, Law Students Against ICE encourage their fellow students to take action at their university. 

The ethical debate here is a complex one, primarily because LexisNexis and Westlaw have such a stronghold on the legal research industry. Although these companies still dominate the majority of the industry of legal research and data, there are new companies like Casetext that are emerging and should be considered instead of the companies that have traditionally been used at both law firms and law schools. Additionally, there are other actions to be taken to start the movement to eliminate the contracts these companies have with ICE. Those who are members of organizations that have contracts affiliated with Thomson Reuters and RELX plc are encouraged to sign the petition demanding that these companies end their contracts with ICE immediately. As more attention is given to this issue, more can be done at each firm and each university to stop the support of immoral deportations. Law students and attorneys should not have to feel the responsibility of supporting companies that aid ICE in inhumane surveillance and deportation of immigrants.