Federal prosecutors have not clarified whether they secretly obtained phone records for journalist Don Lemon using a rare administrative summons, according to a court filing by Lemon’s lawyers on Monday. The lawyers raised concerns about the use of a controversial legal tool, which the government has used to gather information as it charged Lemon and dozens of others with civil rights violations related to a January protest at a church in Saint Paul, Minnesota. In January, officials served Verizon with an administrative summons requesting a log of Lemon’s phone records between December 19 and January 20. This request was not issued by a grand jury, as is standard in criminal investigations, nor was it a court-approved search warrant. Instead, it came directly from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which cited 19 USC 1509 — a lesser-known law that gives the department authority to investigate records related to customs issues. Experts have warned that the government is using this authority to collect data on journalists, activists, and critics, raising concerns that the practice may infringe on the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. Lemon’s lawyers noted that records provided by the government have not confirmed whether Verizon complied with the summons. They contacted prosecutors on Friday for clarification but had not received a response as of Monday. The Justice Department and DHS declined to comment, and Verizon did not respond to a request for comment. Lemon was charged with conspiring to violate federal laws protecting religious expression after covering a protest at a church where activists claimed the pastor was an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) official. The use of 1509 summonses has also affected other journalists, such as Georgia Fort, who was covering the same protest. Her lawyers said they were “stunned” that the government obtained her phone records without notifying her or allowing her to contest the demand. Unlike grand jury subpoenas, companies are not required to comply with 1509 summonses and can force the government to go to court to enforce them. This became especially concerning after a magistrate judge previously rejected a separate effort to obtain YouTube records on Fort and Lemon, emphasizing that journalists have special protections. On Monday, nearly all the defendants charged in the case sought to have the charges dismissed, citing the government’s use of 1509 summonses. In a joint filing, they argued that the government had issued over 90 such summonses to obtain various types of records, including phone, airline, social media, car rental, and employment data. They also contended that the DHS did not have the legal authority to investigate the case. The defendants’ lawyers emphasized that the government exceeded its congressional authority by using a customs-related summons for a domestic criminal investigation. Prosecutors have defended their use of the 1509 summonses, arguing that the law allows them to be used in matters related to ensuring compliance with laws administered by the U.S. Customs Service, which was folded into the DHS. They claimed the summons was appropriate because the protest involved a potential crime against a DHS official, given that the pastor was also an ICE employee. However, the defendants’ lawyers rejected this argument, stating that the law does not grant the DHS subpoena power for every law it investigates. They argued that the reorganization of the customs service into the DHS did not expand the scope of the summons’ authority.