Moorman v. Doe

Concerned for the wellbeing of his Haitian neighbors, Springfield native Plaintiff Sean Moorman joined a volunteer ICE watch group in August 2026. In preparation for this role, Plaintiff underwent training programs to understand his First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights, as well as methods for recording, observing, and reporting law enforcement activity, and techniques for de-escalation. As an ICE watcher, Plaintiff drives around pre-determined areas of Springfield to look for ICE vehicles, personnel, and enforcement activity. When he encounters an ICE vehicle, he follows and monitors it from a safe distance. When he sees ICE enforcement activity, he lawfully and peacefully observes it, reports it to other volunteers to be communicated more widely, and takes videos and pictures. At no point has he unlawfully interfered with ICE activity.

Soon after beginning his observation work, Sean Moorman was targeted for harassment and retaliation by ICE officers. Over less than two weeks, ICE officers have conducted a campaign of intimidation against him, including:

• Swerving a vehicle towards his car as if to ram him;
• Approaching Plaintiff, holding up a phone in his face, and taking close-range pictures or scans of his face, without any legitimate cause;
• Repeatedly converging upon his car with multiple large SUVs in a parking lot, briefly boxing his car into parking spaces, and making him fear for his life;
• Closely tailing him through town for an extended period; and
  waving at him in a manner he took as a gesture to follow them, leading him on a drive beyond the outskirts of town, ultimately ending at Plaintiff’s own house, for no legitimate purpose;
• Once there, pointing at the house (as if to say, “we know where you live”) taking photos of the house and grounds, and of Plaintiff’s wife’s car, as his wife locked herself inside the house in fear;
• Aggressively pursuing and boxing his vehicle in on a public street in Springfield;
• Driving again to his house for no legitimate purpose;
• Pulling alongside his car on a public street, blasting a loud police horn at him, and repeatedly screaming his name before driving away; and
• Moving in three vehicles to surround him and driving in that “formation” for an extended period.

The intimidation and harassment of Mr. Moorman by ICE officers is unconstitutional retaliation against his exercise of his First Amendment rights.

Plaintiff Sean Moorman filed his Complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief and Motion for Temporary Restraining Order against seven unknown ICE officers in the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division (Dayton) on September 1, 2026. Judge Michael Newman was assigned to the case. On the afternoon of September 2, 2026, the Court held a telephone hearing on the issues of the case. As harassment and intimidation by Defendant officers continued, Mr. Moorman filed a supplemental declaration in support of his motion for TRO on September 4.

Later on the evening of September 4, the Court granted the TRO, prohibiting “all ICE officers stationed in Springfield, Ohio” from “engaging in any further threatening, intimidating, and retaliatory action against Moorman” for a period of fourteen days. The Court set a briefing deadline for all parties of 5PM, September 9, and a further hearing on the merits for 2PM, Wednesday, September 16, 2026.

Defendants filed their brief in opposition to the TRO on September 9, 2026; we filed our response simultaneously, affirming that we request that the Court enter a preliminary injunction. On September 10, 2026, the Court issued an order “liberally constru[ing]” Defendants’ brief as a motion to vacate and/or reconsider the TRO and ordered Plaintiff to file a response to the motion by September 14, 2026, with Defendants filing a reply by September 15, 2026.