Slashdot Mirror
Trump Administration Sued Over Phone Searches at US Borders (reuters.com)
The Trump administration has engaged in an unconstitutional practice of searching without a warrant the phones and laptops of Americans who are stopped at the border, a lawsuit filed on Wednesday alleged. From a report: Ten U.S. citizens and one lawful permanent resident sued the Department of Homeland Security in federal court, saying the searches and prolonged confiscation of their electronic devices violate privacy and free speech protections of the U.S. Constitution. DHS could not be immediately reached for comment. The lawsuit comes as the number of searches of electronic devices has surged in recent years, alarming civil rights advocates.
That's probably why they filed in Massachusetts, which is part of the First Circuit Court of Appeals. If they win in the trial and appellate courts, there will then be a split of authority between the First Circuit and the Fourth and Ninth Circuits, which have held the search of electronic devices at the border to be constitutional (subject to minor constraints). The odds then go up considerably that the Supreme Court will grant certiorari to resolve the circuit split.
This has nothing to do with any specific president.
As soon as people started carrying electronic devices across the border, they started having them searched.
The problem isn't that electronic devices are being searched at the border. The problem is this ridiculous notion that the laws that apply everywhere else in the country shouldn't also apply at the borders of the country, And that's something that happened so long ago that I don't know if anyone even remembers who the idiot was who thought that was either a good idea, or consistent with the constitution.
not only are they not immune to lawsuits
Err, yes, they are immune to lawsuits.
That applies to tortious acts and contract matters. The government isn't immune to suits regarding infringement of freedoms, failure to disclose information that it's obligated to disclose, etc. Think of how many ACLU lawsuits there have been, for example.
Slashdot did this during the Bush Administration too.
If the federal government was doing it and it was bad - it was "The Bush Administration" - if it was doing something good - it was the executive organization that did it (justice department, FBI, EPA, etc)
As soon as the Obama Administration came in the script was flipped - if it was bad it was the exective organization and if it was good then it was Obama himself doing it.
Bush didn't need any help. It was overwhelming passed by Congress, all he had to do was ask for it and sign it.
These are the 98 U.S. senators for voted in favor of the US Patriot Act of 2001 (Senator Landrieu (D-LA) did not vote) Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin was the only senator who voted against the Patriot Act on October 24, of 2001.
http://educate-yourself.org/cn...
Very few of the Democrats in the Senate learned their lesson, and so voted to reauthorize it by close to the same numbers in 2006, and Obama signed off on at least one more renewal (I've lost track).
The list of two-time Yeas includes Hillary Cllnton, Chris Dodd, Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, Joe Biden, John Kerry, Rockefeller, Sarbane, both Nelsons, Diane Feinstein, Max Baucus, Joe Lieberman, ...
The House was a tad better as far as Dems voting Nay, it passed the House 357-66 in 2001 and 280-138 in 2006.
The biggest spike? Let's see, a quick Google shows it spiked from 2560 in October 2016 to...2595 in March 2017.
Note that both of those numbers are about triple the number for October 2015.
A few more quick Googles, and I find that, while the problem has gotten a lot more media attention since Trump became President, the problem started back after 9/11, and has continued a steady rise during both the last two Administrations, with essentially no change since Trump got the job (no change, in this case, means the trends have pretty much continued, almost like it was being done by the bureaucracy, rather than the policymakers)....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"