Nekima Levy Armstrong, a 49-year-old lawyer and civil rights activist, is speaking out after the White House shared a digitally altered image of her arrest that she says falsely made her look weak and emotional. The image was posted on the White House’s official social media account and has sparked strong criticism and a wider conversation about how powerful institutions use digital content.
Armstrong was arrested in January after taking part in a protest at Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota. The demonstration was against aggressive immigration enforcement and was meant to support immigrant rights and worship without fear. Videos from the event show people chanting and interrupting the church service, but they do not show violence or chaos.
After her arrest, one official government photo showed Armstrong walking calmly, escorted by law enforcement officers with her expression neutral. But within minutes of that image being posted by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, the White House shared a different version that had been altered. In this doctored picture, Armstrong appeared upset, as if crying, with exaggerated facial features. The image also had the word “ARRESTED” over it and described her as a “far-left agitator.”
Armstrong was shocked when she saw the altered image after being released from jail. She said the edited photo didn’t reflect the reality of her arrest and was meant to make her look weak and defeated. In interviews, she described the manipulation as degrading and hurtful. She compared the effect of the image to historical racist portrayals of Black people, saying the distortion brought up painful associations with past injustices.
“They couldn’t break me by arresting me,” Armstrong said. “So they doctored an image to show the world a false version of that moment to make me look weak.”
The White House did not apologize for the altered photo. Instead, Kaelan Dorr, the deputy communications director, called it a “meme” and posted it again, saying in a brief comment that “Enforcement of the law will continue. The memes will continue.” Critics say this response showed a disregard for the seriousness of manipulating official content.
Digital forensics experts and media observers have warned that using manipulated images in government communications could damage public trust. They pointed out that people often trust official posts and assume photos represent real moments. Blurring the line between real and altered images, especially from a government source, could make it harder for the public to know what is true.
The controversy comes amid broader legal and political battles. Armstrong and eight others were charged after the protest under a federal law that officials say prohibits force or interference at a place of worship. Prosecutors argue the demonstration at the church disrupted religious activities. At the same time, journalists who entered the church to report on the protest were also charged, raising concerns about press freedom.
Armstrong’s lawyers have already cited the altered image in court filings, saying it shows “bad faith” by the government and could prejudice public opinion against her before her case has been decided. Legal analysts say the photo’s release could complicate the government’s legal position by appearing to politicize the situation.
The protest itself was part of a larger national conversation about immigration policy, enforcement tactics, and civil rights. It also followed the death of Renee Good, a Minnesota woman who was fatally shot by an immigration agent earlier in the month. Activists at the church chanted slogans calling for justice and expressing opposition to immigration enforcement policies.
Armstrong, who has a long history of activism and civil rights work, said the experience of being portrayed in a manipulated image was painful, but she hopes it will spark discussion about how images are used in public discourse. She wants people to think critically about what they see online and not accept altered content as fact.
Overall, the incident highlights growing concerns about the use of artificial intelligence and digital editing tools in political communication. As technology makes it easier to change images and videos, many experts say there needs to be clearer rules and ethical standards to prevent misuse.
