Slashdot Mirror
Woman Sues US Border Agents Over Seized iPhone (bbc.com)
An American woman who had her phone seized by border agents as she returned home to the United States is suing the country's border protection agency. Bob the Super Hamste shares a report: Rejhane Lazoja was stopped at Newark airport, New Jersey, after returning from a trip to Switzerland in February. Her iPhone was seized by agents after she refused to unlock it for them. The lawsuit alleges that border agents took a copy of the data on her smartphone and failed to say whether it had been deleted. According to legal documents, US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) kept the phone for more than 120 days before returning it to Ms Lazoja, who is a Muslim woman and wears a hijab. [...] "Neither was there probable cause, nor a warrant [to search the phone]. Therefore, the search and seizure of Ms Lazoja's property violated her rights under the Fourth Amendment," the filing says.
her lawyer should have told her that the border agents have that authority... as bad as it sounds...
probably should wipe phone before travel as a privacy measure. delete pics and texts... probably better to use a travel phone with nothing on it.
its retarded... but we live in retarded times.
The land of the free!
(Some restrictions apply. See insert for details.)
What malarky is this? Americans have the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure in the 4th amendment, from the US Govt. It says so right there, and there are no clauses based on locality.
If a foreign government seeks to search toy in their country, that is between you, them, and maybe the State Dept.
But, our rights are our rights and our government can not breach them, just because we are somewhere abroad.
"Unreasonable" is a giant loophole, however, you can march a brigade of goons through it... See Border Search Exception...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
You're missing one critical element -- and so is the damn story -- whether or not she is a U.S. citizen. The protections of the Constitution *do* apply to U.S. citizens even when outside the country, when applied to actions of the U.S. government. Gitmo's logic only works because the prisoners are "enemy combatants" and not U.S. citizens.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
That would seem to be incorrect: Border Search Exception.
She's not suing CBP. That's pretty stupid since case law says she'd lose under all sorts of "protecting America" style laws.
She's filed a Rule 41(g) Motion instead, or "Motion to Return Property".
In other words, she's basically seeking to have CBP tu "return" all the data they collected from her phone - to not only destroy the images that were created, but any portions thereof, plus to have 3rd parties who many have accessed said image for any reason to again delete that data they may have collected.
Even more, she wants information on what happened to the data, including information on who it may have been provided to for what purposes and such (presumably also to verify that they too have destroyed/returned the data)/
If anything, it's probably a more unique case to go through the courts with and one where she may succeed - it wasn't necessarily wrong to collect the data, but now she's ordering its return and justification for keeping that data. And by "return", legally it means "full deletion" (remember the Waymo vs. Uber? Waymo wanted the "return" of the data which really meant the data was given back and destroyed).
More Details: https://arstechnica.com/tech-p...
The constitution has no such exception. The failure of the courts to enforce the bill of rights doesn't change what it says. This woman's phone was stolen.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
" On the other hand, we have the clear need to secure the border, which requires some level of inspection of persons and the things they are carrying. "
There is simply nothing on the phone that could be illegal enough to warrant seizure like this though; in the sense that border control should be concerned about it.
It's ones and zeroes. It's not produce or livestock that might need to be quarantined, its not radioactive or a bomb. Its not goods which need customs, duties or tarrifs levied.
Yes, it might contain terrorist plots, or child porn, or something bad; but that's true of every single phone in the country -- if there is a legitimate suspicion of that, just like for everyone else -- get a damned warrant, and by all means arrest and search. They've got all the airline reservation data so there are hours of lead time before any actual suspect arrives at the airport.
Beyond that, it's simply not something that really needs to be the concern of customs and border patrol, with carte blanche authority to confiscate, copy, or rummage through. Especially given that ANYTHING that can be smuggled in as a data on a smart phone can be trivially transmitted accross the border completely encrypted via the internet, terrestrial radio, satellite, flashes of light from a boat in international waters, stenography in cat videos on youtube.