Appeals Court: Border electronics searches are okay

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Richard Forno <rforno () infowarrior org>
> Date: April 22, 2008 4:55:47 PM PDT
> To: Blaster <rforno () infowarrior org>
> Cc: David Farber <dave () farber net>
> Subject: Appeals Court: Border electronics searches are okay

> (be warned, ye who carry proprietary business information or  
> personal data
> on your devices......rf)
>
> Border Agents Can Search Laptops Without Cause, Appeals Court Rules
> By Ryan Singel EmailApril 22, 2008 | 6:21:20 PMCategories: Privacy,  
> The
> Courts
>
> http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/04/border-agents-c.html
>
> Federal agents at the border do not need any reason to search through
> travelers' laptops, cell phones or digital cameras for evidence of  
> crimes, a
> federal appeals court ruled Monday, extending the government's power  
> to look
> through belongings like suitcases at the border to electronics.
>
> The unanimous three-judge decision reverses a lower court finding that
> digital devices were "an extension of our own memory" and thus too  
> personal
> to allow the government to search them without cause. Instead, the  
> earlier
> ruling said, Customs agents would need some reasonable and articulable
> suspicion a crime had occurred in order to search a traveler's laptop.
>
> On appeal, the government argued that was too high a standard,  
> infringing
> upon its right to keep the country safe and enforce laws. Civil rights
> groups, joined by business traveler groups, weighed in, defending  
> the lower
> court ruling.
>
> The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the government,  
> finding
> that the so-called border exception to the Fourth Amendment's  
> prohibition on
> unreasonable searches applied not just to suitcases and papers, but  
> also to
> electronics.
>
> The ruling (.pdf) came in a case where customs agents searched the  
> laptop of
> Michael Arnold who was returning from the Philippines. They found  
> images
> they believed to be child pornography, seized the laptop and later  
> arrested
> him. While the lower court ruling excluded from trial the pictures  
> of young
> boys the government says it found on the hard drive, they now can be  
> used
> again.
>
> The panel chose to follow the reasoning of a similar case from the 4th
> Circuit, known as Ickes (.pdf), which held that the government did  
> not need
> any reason to search a vehicle crossing the border.
>
> The 9th's ruling did not, however, clarify whether a traveler has to  
> help
> the government search his computer, by providing the login  
> information, or
> what would happen when the government decided to search a laptop with
> encrypted data on the drive. The defendant in the case can appeal the
> decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, but the Court is unlikely to  
> take up an
> issue that two separate appeals courts have agreed upon.
>
> In the meantime, travelers should be aware that anything on their  
> mobile
> devices can be searched by government agents, who may also seize the  
> devices
> and keep them for weeks or months. When in doubt, think about  
> whether online
> storage or encryption might be tools you should use to prevent the  
> feds from
> rummaging through your journal, your company's confidential business  
> plans
> or naked pictures of you and your-of-age partner in adult fun.
>
> The case is Arnold vs. USA.

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com