Church Plaintiffs File Non-Compliance Motion Against DHS, Attaching a Whipple Shield ROI Documenting an Undercover Agent Inside University Baptist Church

Opening

On the morning of August 20, 2026 — one week after the Minnesota criminal discovery unsealed Operation Puppet Master — the church plaintiffs in New England Synod, ELCA v. DHS filed a Motion for Order to Show Cause, Motion to Expedite, and Notice of Defendants’ Non-Compliance (ECF No. 117, D. Mass. 4:25-cv-40102).

Attached as Exhibit 1: an HSI Report of Investigation from Project Whipple Shield, case number MS02PR26MS0004, ROI MS02PR26MS0004-193, approved June 4, 2026 — reported by SA Katherine Wespetal, approved by SSA Hakan Catalan, the same pair who appear across the Minnesota exhibit set.

This is a second, independent litigation surface for the same surveillance program. Until now every public Whipple Shield document came from the Minnesota criminal docket. This one is a civil RFRA case in Massachusetts, filed by the churches themselves.

What the ROI documents

May 28, 2026 — a “Left Jab” training in the downstairs gymnasium of University Baptist Church.

• UCA-5022 arrived at approximately 7:05 p.m. and “was greeted by several people.”
• The report is explicit about its own limits: “The following is a summary, may not be in chronological order, and is not verbatim. Reference audio and video recordings for additional details and context.”
• The agent recorded attendees introducing themselves, and identified a Signal group.
• “All recordings will be maintained as a part of this case file. The investigation continues.”

The wire fell on the floor. In the report’s own words, as an “Investigative note”: “Due to the physicality of the event, UCA-5022’s concealed body-worn audio recorder erroneously fell to the floor of the gymnasium near the end of the training.” The agent left, realized the device was gone, and returned to retrieve it. The ROI records that she was absent for approximately three minutes and is “last heard on the body-worn recorder’s timestamp at approximately 1:59:58.”

An undercover federal agent wearing a concealed recorder dropped it on the floor of a church gymnasium, and wrote up the gap in coverage as an investigative note.

Why It Matters

The churches are now alleging DHS violated the injunction. Judge Saylor granted a preliminary injunction on 2026-02-13 barring warrantless immigration enforcement inside plaintiff churches, finding plaintiffs likely to succeed on their RFRA claim. This motion is styled as a notice of non-compliance — and the exhibit is the government’s own report placing an undercover agent inside a plaintiff church on May 28, more than three months after the injunction issued.

Note the plaintiff list has grown well beyond the original five ELCA synods: it now includes Delaware-Maryland, Metro D.C., Metropolitan Chicago, Metropolitan New York, Minneapolis Area, Northwest Washington, Southeastern, Sierra Pacific, Southwest California, Southwestern Texas and Upstate New York Synods, plus Alliance of Baptists, American Baptist Churches USA, D.C. Baptist Convention, Metropolitan Community Churches, Southern New England Conference UCC, and three Quaker bodies. Responses are due September 3, 2026.

It confirms the recordings exist. The Ann Arbor ROI said the agent attended “equipped with recording devices”; this one says plainly that audio and video recordings are maintained in the case file and directs readers to them. That is a discoverable, subpoenable body of material.

It sharpens the evidentiary-weight point. Like the Ann Arbor report, this ROI states on its face that it “is a summary… and is not verbatim.” Unlike Ann Arbor, it says recordings exist to check it against. See 2026-04-08–hsi-undercover-operation-zion-lutheran-church-ann-arbor.

Open Questions

• Whether the Minneapolis Area Synod’s presence as a plaintiff brings the Minnesota churches inside the injunction’s scope, and from what date
• What Exhibits 2 through 8 of ECF 117 contain
• Whether any Whipple Shield ROI documents an operation inside a church that was a named plaintiff at the time, which is the sharpest form of the non-compliance claim
• The government’s response, due 2026-09-03
• Whether the maintained audio/video recordings have been sought in either case

Cross-References

• 2026-02-15–project-whipple-shield-hsi-financial-surveillance-minnesota-unions
• 2026-04-08–hsi-undercover-operation-zion-lutheran-church-ann-arbor
• 2026-01-28–puppet-master-accepted-under-cuc-op-keyhole
• litigation-surface-search-strategy-and-the-wider-pattern
• criminalizing-dissent-the-descending-gradient