Fusion Data Centers: Fails To Justify Themselves & Remains A Threat To Liberty

Article posted with permission from the author, Karen Schumacher

It would be interesting to determine just how many Americans are familiar with fusion centers.  Created following the 9/11 attacks and as part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the intent was to improve “collaboration” between the federal government with State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial (SLTT) law enforcement.  More nauseating is that these fusion centers also partner with the private sector.

Included in this collaboration is the gathering and sharing of threat-related information, conducting analysis, and maximizing its “ability to detect, prevent, investigate, and respond to criminal and terrorist activity.”  Since its inception,  emergency response, public health, fire service, and critical infrastructure protection are now included in that data gathering.

In November, 2007, DHS and the Department of Justice (DOJ) requested Governors in each state to “designate a single fusion center to serve as the statewide or regional hub to interface with the Federal Government and coordinate the gathering, processing, analysis, and dissemination of terrorism, law enforcement, and homeland security information.”  Translated, it was “fusing” together federal, state, and local law enforcement.

Since then, each state has created a fusion center.  The list of those centers in each state can be found here.  However, in some states, the name has been changed from fusion center to Criminal Intelligence Center, Information Analysis Center, Information Sharing and Analysis Center, Criminal Intelligence Center, Terrorism and Intelligence Center, or other similar names.  These state fusion centers are interoperable with each other, which means information on you can be shared, not only with the federal government, but also between states.  A breakdown of fusion centers and costs up to 2021 can be found here.

In 2012, it was found that fusion centers did not “produce useful intelligence to support Federal counterterrorism efforts”, and was full of abuses as recent as 2022.  Yet, they sure have collected a lot of information on citizens since that time and continue to do so.  There have been multiple concerns about what data is collected by fusion centers that aren’t necessarily connected to any terrorism threats, including private sector information.  This data collecting and sharing scam just continues to grow as outlined in the DHS Strategy.  Along with data that has been collected and shared for years, it will now include biometric data, including facial recognition that is now required by Real ID, and GIS mapping.  Data sources have included social media, attendance lists for various activities, license plate readers, cell phones, and data brokers.

But intense surveillance, that violates the Fourth Amendment and rights to privacy, just continues to get worse (pg 4-5).

On September 25, 2025, Trump signed Executive Order (EO) NSPM-7, Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence.  Brazen statements were made to justify this EO, such as isolated assassinations being part of an organized campaign to silence speech and change policy outcomes, and were basically criminal conspiracies.  As of yet, none of those assassinations have been connected to any criminal organization, as they were allegedly carried out by lone individuals.

The “campaigns” to organize doxing have been committed by as few as three people, or as yet any identified group.  Doxing is criminal behavior and those responsible should be lawfully accountable.  But, to execute an EO that submerges all citizens under further surveillance is not warranted.

“Anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity” attitudes are targets for surveillance.  Under this definition, it would be impossible to express the right to redress grievances.  Historically, many who protested the government could now be perceived as hostile “towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality”, such as the suffrage movement, abolitionists, and civil rights groups.

Initially set up in 2011, fusion centers were to include public health and medical integration for “health security”, which included massive amounts of data gathering from public health and health care “communities” (pgs 5-7).  This initiative has petered out over time, but was revived under a different purpose.  Healthcare “fraud” is now added as a fusion center, and of course, your personal medical information is needed.  To save face, however, an Amazon fusion center “uses de-identified data”… with publicly available information” to conduct its spying work.

The National Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) that overlaps with fusion centers is another merged federal/local law enforcement unit that has been given further authority by the EO, now including “domestic terrorism” by citizens who may just be exercising their rights.  That again makes those who protested in an effort to “influence the policy of a government” for the right to vote or be treated equally might now qualify as terrorists under this EO.  Still not good enough, the DOJ is now drafting a list of ‘domestic terrorists’.

With all of this sophistication in sharing intelligence between governments, it was a security video and a homeless man who broke the Brown University case, attendees who spotted a man on a roof, a customer and employee who recognized one assassin, and a man who saw someone in his boat.  Cases were broken by the public.  All of the fusion center documents talk about gathering and sharing data, and how that data is used to identify potential threats before anything happens.  Nothing references how threats have been identified and stopped with that data.  Maybe this federalized state and local police force is getting better, as one terrorist group and an individual in Utah were recently stopped, but so many others were not.

Even though not expressly stated, there is no reason to believe that fusion center data won’t be integrated into data centers that will utilize artificial intelligence, providing a much more comprehensive profile on each citizen, and how that might be analyzed against them.  Using AI for predictive policing can also be a slippery slope on rights.

In spite of the recent EO, none of this is intended to take a side swipe at law enforcement.  The majority are dedicated to protecting citizens, but they should be allowed to do their job and arrest those who commit crimes, regardless of any label or which group is involved.  Law enforcement officers should perform their work without all the federal government entanglements.  Centers that are used for nothing more than surveilling and gathering data on citizens need to end before America becomes another China.

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media