Honestly, I would probably rather undergo a strip search than a cellphone scan. There won’t be any incriminating evidence I have forgotten about and everything is done as soon as I leave the room. With a cellphone scan, I have to worry about something that was innocent that I have even forgotten about but may be considered incriminating now. In addition, they would now have enough information for identity theft. Also, I don’t know that is happening with the data or if any back doors have been installed.
Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border
11–20 of 181 posts
Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border
#12Oh, okay then, how about at least for deprivation of civil rights under the color of law?
Well then, what about monetary damages for the people whose data was copied, devices were stolen or could no longer be trusted, wasted time and missed flights, costs of retaining an attorney to defend themselves, etc?
Oh, the result is that the criminals that did this are just going to have to pause for a little bit until some attorney working for their agency, whom we are also paying for, writes a new justification with slightly tweaked reasoning, at which time the perps will resume?!?
Sovereign immunity strikes again. None of these terrible authoritarian dynamics are ever going to be reigned in until sovereign immunity is severely curtailed. At the very least we need civil liability that compensates the victims out of the department's budget. Ideally there should be criminal liability, either on the individuals performing the illegal actions, or if they're following written policy then whomever instituted that policy.
And if you think this sounds extreme, then note it's still more lenient than what the rest of us get! Security guards, private investigators, and even just individuals defending themselves still manage to operate while staying well away from the edges of the law. And in general, staying away from the edges of the law is the exact dynamic we want for those involved in physically coercing others.
Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border
#13Is this then a done deal? Or can the Supreme Court somehow decide there was a half-sentence in a Federalist Paper which argued the opposite and invalidate the ruling?
SCOTUS can absolutely decide differently when one of these gets there.
Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border
#14> Judge Nina Morrison in the Eastern District of New York ruled that cellphone searches are a "nonroutine" search, more akin to a strip search than scanning a suitcase or passing a traveler through a metal detector. Does a strip search also require a warrant though?
Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border
#15> Judge Nina Morrison in the Eastern District of New York ruled that cellphone searches are a "nonroutine" search, more akin to a strip search than scanning a suitcase or passing a traveler through a metal detector. Does a strip search also require a warrant though?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception#Search...
Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border
#16> But on Wednesday, Judge Nina Morrison in the Eastern District of New York ruled that cellphone searches are a "nonroutine" search, more akin to a strip search than scanning a suitcase or passing a traveler through a metal detector. Honestly, I would probably rather undergo a strip search than a cellphone scan. There won’t be any incriminating evidence I have forgotten about and everything is done as soon as I leave…
I was strip searched
When that came up with nothing they appeared in front of a judge claiming drug baggies were sticking out of my ass, then I was imprisoned, printed, and loaded up in a prisoner van and dragged to several hospitals while they tried to convince doctors to X-ray or invasively search me.
It sounds so insane, and gross, people usually don't believe it.
I was sent the medical bills when finished. The search is the beginning, after comes years of being chased by debt collectors.
Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border
#17Is this then a done deal? Or can the Supreme Court somehow decide there was a half-sentence in a Federalist Paper which argued the opposite and invalidate the ruling?
This is a ruling by a District Court. It could be appealed to the Circuit Court, and then to the Supreme Court. In the federal court system, District Court decisions are not binding precedent. Circuit Court decisions bind the District Courts in their circuit, and Supreme Court decisions bind all lower courts. This District Court is in the Second Circuit. Another District Court in the same Circuit made a similar decis…
When there is a "circuit split" like this, with different appellate courts going in opposite directions you are almost 100% guaranteed SCOTUS has to step in to fix it.
I don't know the outcome of this, as I've not studied border searches in years, but while SCOTUS went in the favor of defendants on prior search cases (e.g. Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373, cellphone searches on person during arrest; Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), cellphone GPS logs from carrier; United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012), GPS attached to car), the court has changed to the right, which generally (but not always) means less defendant-friendly, more government-friendly.
If I had to wager, SCOTUS will uphold warrantless border searches.
Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border
#18Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border
#19Is this then a done deal? Or can the Supreme Court somehow decide there was a half-sentence in a Federalist Paper which argued the opposite and invalidate the ruling?
IIRC pretty much 99% of state and fed courts had ruled against the warrant requirement for GPS tracking until it hit SCOTUS and they went the opposite direction (just): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Jones_(2012)
Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border
#20I’m curious, if your phone is locked, were they ever able to demand that you unlock it so they could conduct a search?
Passwords are personal data, faces and fingerprints are not, apparently.