Homeland Security Border Agents Can Seize Your Phone (cnn.com)

Slashdot reader v3rgEz writes: A Wall Street Journal reporter has shared her experienced of having her phones forcefully taken at the border -- and how the Department of Homeland Security insists that your right to privacy does not exist when re-entering the United States. Indeed, she's not alone: Documents previously released under FOIA show that the DHS has a long-standing policy of warrantless (and even motiveless) seizures at the border, essentially removing any traveler's right to privacy.
"The female officer returned 30 minutes later and said I was free to go," according to the Journal's reporter, adding. "I have no idea why they wanted my phones..."

Comments

Easy

[Anonymous Coward]

"I have no idea why they wanted my phones..."

They didn't want the phones, they wanted to exercise power over you. They're low paid, in shitty jobs and hated for it. Acts like this are about all they can look forwards to.

Re:Encryption

[ArchieBunker]

They can't compel you but they could hold you in jail for a while.

A journalist does not know what is going on?

[Ecuador]

A journalist (of the WSJ no less) has no idea what is going on in their country? That's what was the most surprising to me. I mean, I knew about the 100-mile border rule and I am neither a journalist, nor a US citizen. I thought the US journalists are in on it with the government by not drawing attention to the slowly eroding US constitutional rights, but in this case it is not some conspiracy, the journalist is an idiot. Where idiot here is also used in the original meaning from the ancient greek (no unicode to list it here) which was referred to people who were not interested in the affairs of the State.
If a journalist whose job is to know stuff exactly like this, is surprised to find something like that out, what hope do the people in the US realize that they have let them take away their rights one by one?

Wrong case for 4th amend, Customs can search

[drnb]

Exactly this. In this era of a complete disregard for the 4th amendment ...

I agree there is disregard for the 4th amendment but this is NOT the case to argue that. US Customs has *always* been allowed to search your person and property at a border crossing since the founding days of our republic. What may be arguable in this case is that a TSA agent did the search not a Customs agent. Of course "deputizing" TSA as customs agents would close that loophole.

Is there any government on earth that does not have the right to search the person and property of an international traveler when they cross the border? Note "international traveler", within the EU you are no longer an international traveler, but when originally entering the EU from outside you were.

And by at the border I am referring to at the border, not 100 miles inside. That is a different situation IMO.

Re:Wrong case for 4th amend, Customs can search

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is the border patrol agents are allowing foreign citizens to enter the county at will, while harassing and intimidating the USAian citizens. Drugs can come in freely, but if you have dog food re-entering the USA from Canada without the appropriate documentation and certification, they will hold you up against the wall and ass rape you. The border patrol agents do not patrol the border to protect it. They patrol it to harass, intimidate, and demand fees of the citizens of the USA. It is easier to leave the country than to reenter it. I am wondering if maybe the thing to do is just stay away from the 3rd world hell hole that the USA has become under President Obama.

Just my 2 pennies.

Troubling

[Locke2005]

What I find most troubling about this is that they demanded her phone, but then backed down when she insisted on getting WSJ lawyers involved. That implies that they were attempting to do something by intimidation that they were aware they had no legal right to force her to do. Is anyone else bothered by law enforcement using this tactic? I've heard of other cases, i.e. stopping people on the street and tellling them, "You need to show me what's in your bag" Well, according to the Fourth Amendment, no I don't, but probably most people assume law enforcement understands the law better than they do. Fact is, citizens are required to abide by thousands of laws, and ignorance is not an excuse. But if law enforcement doesn't apply the laws correctly, they can always claim ignorance of the law. Not really a reciprocal balance of rights, is it?

Don't travel to US.

[stooo]

The US government doesn't want us going to this crazy country, and get some tourist and travel economy going.
So we'll travel elsewhere.
Don't travel to US.

Re:Don't travel to US.

[david_bonn]

... except for the fact that I have had similar experiences in Canada, the UK, and Switzerland. With both laptops and smartphones.

So now I travel with a burner phone and an old netbook. No big loss if they are confiscated.

Re:Don't take anything electronic into the USA

[myowntrueself]

Americans, why are you putting up with this? By passively accepting these acts, you are letting your government slowly turn your once-great nation into a totalitarian police state. It brings to mind the speech from V For Vendetta:

"I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the high chancellors, Clinton, Bush, and Obama. They promised you order, they promised you peace, and all they demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent."

Why do you think there are Libertarians in North America and practically nowhere else?