Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

reason.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 181 posts

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#71

Post by john_the_writer »

CPAhem wrote: post #57
OptionOfT wrote: post #52

Does this apply only to U.S. Citizens? Or does it apply to everybody? And if it does, is it reason to refuse someone? I.e. can they refuse an L1B visa holder entry because he/she doesn't allow them to search the phone?

It is a pity it does not apply in Australia. They search 40,000 devices a year there, and consfiscate your device if you refuse.

I travel with a dumb phone. I do this because if I get mugged, I'm out something I don't care about. I wear a tin wedding ring when travelling too.

I've been asked for my phone at customs, and I just hand over the "nokia". They can play snake all the like.

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#72

Post by john_the_writer »

OptionOfT wrote: post #52

Does this apply only to U.S. Citizens? Or does it apply to everybody? And if it does, is it reason to refuse someone? I.e. can they refuse an L1B visa holder entry because he/she doesn't allow them to search the phone?

Something to keep in mind.. If you're traveling to Canada or Aus, then your 4th don't count. Same with all the other amendments. And with the data sharing, there's nothing stopping Canada from sharing with the US.

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#73

Post by DonHopkins »

BenFranklin100 wrote: post #28
BenFranklin100 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A textualist interpretation of the constitution would likely take a very dim view of the federal government trying to stretch its powers and get around the Fourth Amendment. I don’t think we have much to worry about on this topic from the current court.

For the Hacker News members who are reflexively downvoting my comment, presumably for political reasons, I refer you to Riley vs. California, the 2014 SCOTUS decision that ruled warrantless searches of cell phones were unconstitutional: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/573/373/ The opinion was written by Roberts with a concurrence by Alito. Again, presumably, the 2024 court is likely to take an even a dimm…

Not for political reasons. It's because you're such a debaucherous womanizer! ;)

https://www.historyoasis.com/post/benjamin-franklin-the-woma...

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#74

Post by amluto »

withinboredom wrote: post #66
eurleif wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Passwords are personal data, faces and fingerprints are not, apparently. The rulings you're referring to are based on the Fifth Amendment. They don't involve the privacy rights of the Fourth Amendment. Rather, they treat the act of revealing your password as testimonial: if you say "my password is hunter2", you are testifying; and the Fifth Amendment says you cannot be forced to testify against yourself; so you cann…

That’s like saying if my house is protected by a passcode lock, the cops can just break down my door and walk in. Sure, they can, but there are clear rules of when they can enter and search my property without my consent. So, sure, they can enter my phone, but that doesn’t mean they have the right to in the first place.

The comment you’re replying to specifically discusses Fifth Amendment rights. The police would not generally be violating those rights by entering your house without a warrant. That would be a Fourth Amendment issue.

(One might argue that breaking your door without due process of law would be a Fifth Amendment violation. I have no idea what existing precedent says about that.)

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#75

Post by returningfory2 »

usr1106 wrote: post #70
OptionOfT wrote: post #52

Does this apply only to U.S. Citizens? Or does it apply to everybody? And if it does, is it reason to refuse someone? I.e. can they refuse an L1B visa holder entry because he/she doesn't allow them to search the phone?

The article does not seem to cover that question. From previous discussions I have the impression that foreigners are not granted any constitutional rights at the border or even when in their home country (their communication can be freely intercepted). So the US is nowadays on my personal list of totalitarian states that I don't want to travel to. They definitely have better legislation and courts than Russia or Nor…

Which countries do you think have better rights regimes than the US? Ie which countries _are_ you willing to travel to?

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#76

Post by DonHopkins »

withinboredom wrote: post #67
AndroTux wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Face ID, just close your eyes.

There’s no delay. If it even sees you as you are closing your eyes, it unlocks. My son and I just tested this.

Then train it to recognize your face with your eyes closed, or winking, then keep both your eyes opened! ;)

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#77

Post by lionkor »

returningfory2 wrote: post #75
usr1106 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article does not seem to cover that question. From previous discussions I have the impression that foreigners are not granted any constitutional rights at the border or even when in their home country (their communication can be freely intercepted). So the US is nowadays on my personal list of totalitarian states that I don't want to travel to. They definitely have better legislation and courts than Russia or Nor…

Which countries do you think have better rights regimes than the US? Ie which countries _are_ you willing to travel to?

Not OP but almost all of Europe comes to mind.

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#78

Post by fsflover »

dheera wrote: post #62
arnonejoe wrote: post #18

I’m curious, if your phone is locked, were they ever able to demand that you unlock it so they could conduct a search?

Use the most obscure fork of Android possible, learn the most obscure language in Africa and set your UI to that language, ...

> Use the most obscure fork of Android possible

Why Android? Try GNU/Linux with SXMo instead: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39155103

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#79

Post by MyFedora »

RIMR wrote: post #22
mindslight wrote: post #12

So these criminals that have been performing the illegal searches. The next step is they'll be charged with false imprisonment, extortion, and conspiracy, right? Oh, 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…

You can't apply the law retroactively. The law, despite being unconstitutional, allowed this, so you can't go back and arrest people who weren't breaking the law at the time. What you can do is track back every arrest that resulted from one of these searches, and ask for all charges and convictions to be vacated/overturned because the evidence was collected in an unconstitutional way. I'm more interested in damage co…

> You can't apply the law retroactively.

I don't know, it depends on their mood I guess? I'm unaware of the U.S. legal system specifically, but the Court of Justice of the European Union invalidated laws retroactively in the past. This isn't exclusive to EU laws either. My home country did the same thing with national laws. So I don't know, maybe the US can do that as well, but people just assume the US can't because it feels intuitive for it to be that way?

Re: Courts Close the Loophole Letting the Feds Search Your Phone at the Border

#80

Post by impossiblefork »

dheera wrote: post #62
arnonejoe wrote: post #18

I’m curious, if your phone is locked, were they ever able to demand that you unlock it so they could conduct a search?

Use the most obscure fork of Android possible, learn the most obscure language in Africa and set your UI to that language, ...

Nah, you bring a new phone with no contacts other than family and colleagues on it.
Post reply on HN