Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Thursday May 02 2019, @03:51PM   Printer-friendly
from the delusions-of-grandeur dept.

This is a guest post by Hugh Handeyside, Senior Staff Attorney, ACLU National Security Project, Nathan Freed Wessler, Staff Attorney, ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, and Esha Bhandari, Staff Attorney, ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. It was originally posted on the ACLU Speak Freely blog.

In September 2017, we, along with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, sued the federal government for its warrantless and suspicionless searches of phones and laptops at airports and other U.S. ports of entry.

The government immediately tried to dismiss our case, arguing that the First and Fourth Amendments do not protect against such searches. But the court ruled that our clients — 10 U.S. citizens and one lawful permanent resident whose phones and laptops were searched while returning to the United States — could move forward with their claims.

Since then, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement have had to turn over documents and evidence about why and how they conduct warrantless and suspicionless searches of electronic devices at the border. And their officials have had to sit down with us to explain — under oath — their policies and practices governing such warrantless searches.

What we learned is alarming, and we're now back in court with this new evidence asking the judge to skip trial altogether and rule for our clients.

Source: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/04/we-got-us-border-officials-testify-under-oath-heres-what-we-found-out


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 02 2019, @07:09PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 02 2019, @07:09PM (#838051)

    especially since the major one had to do with a car in a home driveway, which is legally considerably different from a car at the border

    Unless that driveway was within 100 miles of a border: https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone [aclu.org] then there is no legal difference.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 5, Funny) by bob_super on Thursday May 02 2019, @09:38PM (1 child)

    by bob_super (1357) on Thursday May 02 2019, @09:38PM (#838141)

    Yet another reason to convert to metric : 100km is 40% more freedom !

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 03 2019, @05:58AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 03 2019, @05:58AM (#838320)

      Yet another reason to convert to metric : 100km is 40% more freedom !

      And as part of metrification they'll add another zero to round the numbers...