
Court: Feds Can't Just Grab Someone's Laptop at the Border - headShrinker
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150818/16495632000/doj-dismisses-case-after-court-explains-that-feds-cant-just-grab-someones-laptop-border.shtml
======
discardorama
Will this stop the next Border Patrol person from grabbing a laptop? Most
definitely not. They can grab it, and then let the defendant wind his way
through the courts. This isn't new, by the way; I remember going back all the
way to Steve Jackson Games[1] that the government will seize the stuff willy-
nilly, and then let you fight it out in the courts.

Violations of our basic rights will continue until there is tangible
punishment for an LEO for doing so.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Jackson_Games,_Inc._v._U...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Jackson_Games,_Inc._v._United_States_Secret_Service)

~~~
joering2
Exactly.

I don't travel much international, like twice a year, but know dates in
advance. I clone my drive and ship image encrypted ahead of my trip. I travel
with laptop without hard drive in it.

This is of course, inconvenience, but not illegal. Many times they will ask me
to "turn it on" to make sure this is not a bomb disguised as a laptop, but you
don't need a hard drive to have BIOS flash on your screen.

~~~
tajen
Tonight someone invited me to give a talk at his business conference in NYC in
front of 80 potential customers. I refused. I don't travel to US:

\- I have porn on my computer, obviously not underage but what am I supposed
to say if the border agent asks me "Is this subject underage?"

\- I use a false name on Facebook. This is impersonation against an american
interest.

\- I've downloaded torrents. Even if I delete the files, I'm pretty sure there
are footprints everywhere. Pretty sure there's jail time for piracy, and being
my third offense in this list, I'm pretty sure it could be considered as a
repeat offense.

There's a reason why we have a right to privacy. It's because everyone has
very fluid limits on things that are forbidden, and everyone, including
elected officials, breaks them. But not everyone is punished. So I'd rather
not cross the US border.

------
GrinningFool
The headline is misleading, and I shouldn't be surprised that techdirt didn't
explore the language being used:

    
    
        > After considering all of the facts and authorities set 
        > forth above, then, the Court finds, under the totality of 
        > the unique circumstances of this case, that the imaging 
        > and search of the entire contents of Kim’s laptop, aided 
        > by specialized forensic software, for a period of 
        > unlimited duration and an examination of unlimited scope, 
        > for the purpose of gathering evidence in a pre-existing 
        > investigation, was supported by so little suspicion of 
        > ongoing or imminent criminal activity, and was so 
        > invasive of Kim’s privacy and so disconnected from not 
        > only the considerations underlying the breadth of the 
        > government’s authority to search at the border, but also 
        > the border itself, that it was unreasonable.
    

Unless I'm reading it wrong, this is a very narrow ruling that can't really be
used as precedent for other situations.

In this one unique case, DHS was told they were not justified in their
actions. There's nothing in this language that says other seizures, in other
circumstances, are not acceptable.

~~~
booruguru
That run-on sentence would have made my high school English teacher weep.

~~~
monochromatic
It's actually not a run-on. It's certainly a poor sentence though.

------
jayess
The court's order suppressing the search has more detail on the situation and
the government's arguments:
[https://www.unitedstatescourts.org/federal/dcd/159072/42-0.h...](https://www.unitedstatescourts.org/federal/dcd/159072/42-0.html)

"The search of the laptop began well after Kim had already departed, and it
was conducted approximately 150 miles away from the airport. The government
engaged in an extensive examination of the entire contents of Kim’s hard drive
after it had already been secured, and it accorded itself unlimited time to do
so. There was little or no reason to suspect that criminal activity was afoot
at the time Kim was about to cross the border, and there was little about this
search – neither its location nor its scope and duration – that resembled a
routine search at the border. The fundamental inquiry required under the
Fourth Amendment is whether the invasion of the defendant’s right to privacy
in his papers and effects was reasonable under the totality of the
circumstances, and the Court finds that it was not."

------
abalashov
Unfortunately, this case carries no implications for arbitrary search and
seizure (in many cases with no return of hardware and no recourse) of
computers on arrival to the US. That has been the major point of controversy,
vide Jacob Appelbaum.

------
dcole2929
Reminds me of how the DOJ keeps dropping cases anytime someone questions their
sting ray tech. Seems like moving forward, the DOJ, is going to try their
hardest to keep any of these cases from ever getting appealed anywhere near
the supreme court. Even if it costs them a few cases here or there.

~~~
pluma
Straight out of Sun Tzu. Why fight battles when you can score easy wins
elsewhere?

------
pluma
If I'm reading this correctly, this is only about grabbing someone's laptop
when they are _leaving_ the country. Does this in any way affect people who
are entering the country?

~~~
logfromblammo
Given the words "unique circumstances of this case," it is unlikely that this
decision was intended to set precedent for anything.

It would appear that the court reiterates that searches and seizures at the
border needed to be supported by reasonable suspicion, and the examination
needed to be limited in scope and duration.

It seems like nothing in the statement would stop them from seizing your
laptop for two months just because it has a BSD Beastie or a Linux Tux sticker
on it. Remember, the suspicion only has to be reasonable _to them_.

