There is hope for the US, hard to believe with the current state of affairs.
You mean pulling out of the various wars? Or the awesome economey? Or just the BS media?
Yes.
Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional
221–230 of 617 posts
Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional
#222Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that is true in practice It is true in practice. One example: the children of illegal immigrants are legally entitled to public education, even though they aren't citizens.
This gets a couple things wrong: 1) People who aren’t citizens are still entitled to public education. Many green card holders go to US public schools, for instance 2) Anyone born on US soil is a US citizen regardless of their parents immigration status
Is the first point a constitutional issue? I don't recall the constitution guaranteeing anyone a public education.
Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure about the legal justification, but I don't think that is true in practice. For example a tourist or someone on an expired visa (edit: or an unexpired but non-immigrant visa) doesn't have the same 2A rights as a US citizen or permanent resident.
The well regulated militia is subject to regulation.
In colonial era English language, well regulated refers to something being properly functioning, ie in working order. It has nothing to do with regulations.
Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional
#224I’m not sure to whom the reasonable suspicion has to be announced? It makes it hard for me, a lay person, to understand the practical ramifications of this decision. Would the suspicion have to be announced to me, when I’m asked to unlock my phone, or would it have to be presented to a court, when they are asked to prosecute me based on the contents of my phone? If they find illegal content on my phone, wouldn’t the…
The point of the law is that even if law enforcement finds evidence of guilt via illegal search, they cannot use that evidence in court. This is a crucial protection for citizens. The point of the ruling isn't that it prevents the search, it prevents the result of that search from being used against you. If law enforcement wishes to establish the guilt of a suspect in court, it has to use only evidence it obtained th…
> if law enforcement finds evidence of guilt via illegal search, they cannot use that evidence in court.
This is not strictly correct. If law enforcement violates your rights via an illegal search, they cannot use that evidence against you. However, they may be able to use the evidence against others.
For example, suppose the police illegally search your house and find drugs and a list of customers. You may be able to exclude that evidence from being used against you but your customers may not be so lucky because it was not their 4th Amendment rights that were violated by the illegal search.
Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional
#225Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional
#226Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except travelers are not "on us soil" until granted entry by customs. Customs could just deny entry if foreign travelers won't voluntarily consent to search.
Sure... but I don't know where US citizens will go if they do not have residence in another country. Not everyone getting searched reside outside the US.
In that case you as a citizen are allowed to enter, but whatever they're searching (phone, computer, etc) may be detained and you'll be given a receipt and (often) an opportunity to claim it at a later date.
Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional
#228Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except travelers are not "on us soil" until granted entry by customs. Customs could just deny entry if foreign travelers won't voluntarily consent to search.
If you make that argument then the customs officers are also NOT on US soil and have no authority to search phones (or do anything) at all
It depends on the entry point. If I go through US customs in the Toronto airport, it's on Canadian soil. If someone there is having an issue with the process, they can withdraw their entry request and leave. That's perfectly fine and they shouldn't be punished for it. You don't have that option if you use a land crossing as you're physically inside the US.
Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional
#229Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a silly (mis)characterization of what this is. Some rights are only afforded to the citizenry, and that is not inherently evil and is often the only reasonable approach. Other rights are afforded to everyone. The discussion centers around teasing out what the Constitution means when it uses person/people.
I don’t think it’s silly to suggest that maybe all humans should have the same protections against their rights being violated.
It doesn't make sense to extend the right to vote to tourists, for one. I could imagine a flood of tourists at election time from certain countries.
Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional
#230But are travelers (foreigners) part of "the people"?
> But are travelers (foreigners)
International travelers entering the US (who were subjected to the policy) are not all foreigners.
> part of "the people"?
Yes, "the people" in the Fourth Amendment (and most of the rest of the Constitution) are the people subject to the authority of the United States government, which is basically everyone within US territory, however transitorily, and not exempt from US authority by treaty (e.g., diplomats, etc., are excluded.)