What public prosecutions have resulted from doxxing federal law enforcement since 2024?
Executive summary
Since 2024, publicly reported federal prosecutions directly tied to doxxing federal law enforcement are limited but real: at least two plea convictions tied to a criminal group that stole federal personnel data in 2024, and a separate federal criminal complaint filed in 2025 accusing a man of doxxing an ICE lawyer and encouraging “swatting” [1] [2] [3]. Wider reporting and advocacy documents show growing concern, proposed federal legislation, and scattered state responses, but no comprehensive catalog of prosecutions exists in the sources reviewed [4] [5] [6] [7].
1. Known criminal pleas and convictions: the ViLE network in 2024
Public reporting documents at least two guilty pleas in mid‑2024 connected to a group prosecutors called “ViLE,” in which members stole highly sensitive personal data — including Social Security numbers and driver’s license information — and used that information to threaten victims with public exposure unless they paid a ransom, conduct described as doxxing; Sagar Steven Singh pleaded guilty June 17, 2024, and co‑defendant Nicholas Ceraolo pleaded guilty in May 2024 in the same Brooklyn federal prosecution [1]. Those pleas are concrete examples of federal enforcement action against persons who accessed a federal law‑enforcement database and used the information as part of a doxxing/ransom scheme [1]. The available reporting frames these as crimes against individuals using federal data, rather than prosecutions under a statute specifically labeled “doxxing federal law enforcement,” but they demonstrate that the Justice Department has used existing cybercrime and identity‑theft tools to prosecute doxxing‑adjacent conduct [1] [8].
2. A 2025 federal criminal complaint alleging targeted doxxing of an ICE attorney
In a high‑profile example that postdates 2024, the Justice Department filed a federal criminal complaint and arrested Gregory John Curcio in October/November 2025, charging him with publishing an ICE lawyer’s home address and directing others to “swat” her and her family, alleging an extended harassment campaign that began in January 2024 [2] [3]. The Department of Homeland Security publicly condemned the escalation of threats to federal law enforcement and cited the Curcio allegations in that statement [2]. The DOJ release describes the charge as violating a federal law protecting individuals performing official duties and notes the maximum statutory penalty if convicted — signaling that prosecutors are willing to bring traditional criminal statutes to bear against targeted exposure of federal personnel [3].
3. Broader enforcement context, legislative responses and constitutional concerns
Federal prosecutors and attorneys general have signaled heightened focus on doxxing, swatting and related threats since 2024, and lawmakers have moved to codify protections for officers: Congress considered the Protecting Law Enforcement from Doxxing Act in 2025, which would criminalize public release of a federal officer’s name with intent to obstruct investigations or immigration operations [5] [6]. At the same time, civil‑liberties organizations warn that broad anti‑doxxing laws risk chilling protected speech and could sweep in legitimate disclosures about public officials, urging careful statutory design [9]. State legislatures and legal analysts also show a patchwork approach — some states have specific anti‑doxxing provisions for public officials while many rely on existing harassment, stalking or privacy statutes [7] [8].
4. What the public record does not show and why that matters
The public sources reviewed do not provide a comprehensive ledger of every federal prosecution since 2024 that involved doxxing of federal personnel; instead they document isolated, high‑visibility cases (ViLE pleas and the Curcio complaint) and policy responses [1] [3] [5]. Advocacy, DOJ internal letters and state analyses stress rising incidents and prosecutorial interest but also note investigative challenges — spoofed calls, synthetic voices and cross‑jurisdictional digital traces — that complicate bringing charges [10] [4]. Because many investigations remain sealed, prosecutions may be pending, resolved without publicity, or pursued under broader cybercrime or harassment statutes that reporting does not always label “doxxing,” the available public record likely understates the total enforcement activity [4] [8].
5. Bottom line: limited but escalating public prosecutions, with growing policy focus
Publicly documented federal prosecutions specifically identified as doxxing of federal law enforcement since 2024 are limited to discrete, reported actions — the 2024 ViLE guilty pleas involving stolen federal data and the 2025 federal complaint against Gregory Curcio for doxxing and soliciting swatting of an ICE attorney — set against a background of increasing executive, legislative, and civil‑society attention and debate over how to balance safety and speech [1] [3] [5] [9]. The record in the supplied reporting stops short of a full accounting; further transparency from prosecutors and consolidated tracking would be needed to produce a definitive list of all public prosecutions in this space [4] [7].