
Are You Living in a Fourth Amendment Exclusion Zone? - scotty79
http://www.storyleak.com/are-you-living-in-fourth-amendment-exclusion-zone/
======
eli
I think it's a story that deserves to be told, but this particular blog adds
very little value over the source material the ACLU published in 2006-2008:
[http://www.aclu.org/national-security_technology-and-
liberty...](http://www.aclu.org/national-security_technology-and-liberty/are-
you-living-constitution-free-zone)

Here's the HN discussion from two years ago:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1961071>

------
mutagen
A friend shared this video of assorted people exercising their fourth
amendment rights at some of these internal checkpoints:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4Ku17CqdZg>

Predictably it isn't long before Godwin's Law is invoked.

While some were obviously successful through simple civil disobedience, I
wonder how others turned out. The guy that apparently ignored an order to pull
into secondary may have had a rougher go at it. The California agricultural
inspections have stood up to challenge [1] and I sympathize with their purpose
more so than a 'zone' including most of the population of the country.

[1] <http://law.justia.com/cases/california/calapp3d/104/505.html>

~~~
RyanMcGreal
> Predictably it isn't long before Godwin's Law is invoked.

The purpose of Godwin's Law is not to gainsay all comparisons to Hitler and
the Nazis, but rather to gainsay _inappropriate_ comparisons. I would argue
that a US federal law enforcement checkpoint that clearly, unambiguously and
persistently violates the US Bill of Rights is a reasonable place to start
thinking about other governments that violate human rights. The comparison to
Nazi Germany may by hyperbolic but it's not beyond the pale.

------
biot
The solution to this is to find a whole bunch of DHS employees who feel that
these seizures are unjust and who are authorized to perform seizures
themselves. Then have them go around rampantly seizing as much as they can
from as many high-profile people as they can. Seize the devices from judges,
lawyers, congress members, TV reporters, actors, children, and so on. Only by
flagrantly exercising the "rights" the DHS claims they have will sanity
ultimately prevail. They may lose their jobs, but I'm sure there's people
willing to make that small sacrifice for defending liberty.

~~~
FireBeyond
"They may lose their jobs, but I'm sure there's people willing to make that
small sacrifice for defending liberty."

Are you? It's remarkably easy to say that getting fired from your job to make
a point is but a "small sacrifice" when it's not your job, your livelihood,
your family and/or home on the line.

If it's such a small sacrifice, perhaps some people could game the system -
apply for a job with DHS (they're hiring!
[https://dhs.usajobs.gov/JobSearch/Search/GetResults?Keyword=...](https://dhs.usajobs.gov/JobSearch/Search/GetResults?Keyword=border&Location=&search.x=-1475&search.y=-403&search=Search%21&AutoCompleteSelected=False)),
and do this to make a point. In fact, I volunteer you for this noble, but
small, sacrifice, that you're so willing to suggest others do.

~~~
biot
I'm not American but if I were and working at the DHS already and hated where
things have been going, then for sure I would. I spent some time in the
reserves knowing full well that I could be called to defend my country with my
life. How utterly trivial in comparison losing one's job is. I wouldn't
recommend it for someone with a family, kids, and a mortgage but if you're
young and single, why not? Who cares about keeping a job that consists of
depriving your fellow citizens of their constitutional rights?

~~~
freddealmeida
I'm not sure some one like that would actually work in the DHS. It would be
anathema to them. Is it possible to sue them for this? Even if you yourself
have not yet had your rights removed?

------
jbellis
I see a bunch of stories about this recently, but they all seem to derive from
this 2008 one: [http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty/homeland-
sec...](http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty/homeland-security-
assuming-broad-powers-turning-vast-swaths-us)

Has there been any actual new reporting since then?

~~~
ibejoeb
Cases are making their way through the courts. House v. Napolitano is the
furthest along, I think. The court denied the government's motion to dismiss.
[http://www.uscourts.gov/Multimedia/Cameras/DistrictofMassach...](http://www.uscourts.gov/Multimedia/Cameras/DistrictofMassachusetts/11-cv-10852.aspx)

I really think this just needs to move up the chain. I can't imagine higher
level courts weakening the fourth amendment.

~~~
largesse
Is this a case where the plaintiff actually crossed the border, or an
exclusion zone case where he just happened to be within about 50 miles of the
border?

~~~
pfedor
It was at the O'Hare airport:
[http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/2011.09.21_-_doc_17_-_pl._s...](http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/2011.09.21_-_doc_17_-_pl._statement_of_material_facts_and_response_to_defs.__statement_of_material_f.pdf)

~~~
largesse
Not the best case for the original issue then.

~~~
ibejoeb
Why not? It's in the zone. House is a US citizen. The only complicating factor
is that he was involved in political speech, so now we're dealing with first
amendment issues, too.

------
pfedor
Let me repeat what has been said in the other Hacker News threads about the
same story:

This is neither the law nor the actual practice in the US. It is just
something crazy that DHS once said. If they ever actually searched someone 100
miles away from the border, that person could sue and there is no reason to
believe that the verdict would be different from Almeida-Sanchez v. United
States.

~~~
ck2
What you are repeating is wrong.

There are checkpoints a hundred miles from the border in many states and
several videos of people suffering horrible results when they refuse searches
at these checkpoints.

The TSA also routinely performs searches far from the border with their VIPR
team. (because someone might drive a train into a building?
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_Intermodal_Prevention_a...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_Intermodal_Prevention_and_Response_team)
)

~~~
stock_toaster
Interesting section in that wikipedia about Amtrak temporarily banning
TSA/VIPR from its property.

~~~
ck2
That ban is over and VIPR has been back at train stations since.

Here's a story from January 2013
[http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/east_bay...](http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/east_bay&id=8957075)

The most alarming part is how the "news" is now seemingly okay with all this.

------
mpyne
Well on the one hand you have to draw the "customs/immigration enforcement"
line _somewhere_. And "defense in depth" certainly makes as much sense in the
real world as it does in computer security.

But on the other hand I don't see a way for this to actually appreciably
positively affect U.S. border security without stripping away most of what it
means to be an American at all.

Even random checks at a high enough interval to give a good chance at making
it too risky to attempt a terrorist plot would be tremendously impacting on
day-to-day life. The effect of the DHS would be much more severe than the
effect of any supposed terrorists themselves!

Better instead to use any such resources on things more beneficial to the
common welfare, and to get rid of the extraneous legal authority.

------
hakaaaaak
I am in support of privacy and therefore I'm in support of the ACLU in theory
on this one, but...

That map is fucking ridiculous. There is no way they would search in the
middle of a rural area without access from waterway, etc., and yet that is
what much of this map highlights. Even if it is "factually correct", it isn't
realistic, even for the most nutcase DHS employee. The everglades? Give me a
fucking break.

[http://cdn.storyleak.com/wp-
content/uploads/2013/02/fourth-a...](http://cdn.storyleak.com/wp-
content/uploads/2013/02/fourth-amendment-free-zone-dhs.gif)

~~~
burntsushi
Huh? That map highlights 2/3 of the country's population because of dense
population centers near the coast. Just because it happens to overlap with the
everglades is kind of irrelevant.

~~~
hakaaaaak
It isn't just the everglades. Most of the area covered is rural, swampland,
farmland, etc. and would not be under suspicion, ever. It is a ridiculous map.
It would be one thing if waterways and major cities were highlighted, but it
is just over the top, completely. Highlighting all of it makes people in those
areas worry unnecessarily when they need not. Finally, Homeland Security does
not have the resources to implement searches in all of these places, nor will
they knock on the door of every random apartment in Washington, D.C.

This is a sideshow to real privacy problems and a waste of my time and yours.
The ACLU should be focused on the fact that our communications are being
monitored, because that is something that is much more worrisome.

------
downandout
Appalling, but sadly, not at all surprising. We have not-so-slowly been losing
our rights for a very long time.

~~~
JulianMorrison
It's the other way around.

The America the constitution talks about never existed. Most especially if you
were black or female, but even if you were white and male if you were poor, or
a union organizer, or a communist, or an anarchist, or a protester, or a
striker, or a member of an unusual religion. In fact basically it was a pack
of lies for anyone not already in the mainstream elite. And if you are in the
mainstream elite in 2013, rest assured, this one does not apply to you either.

In fact, the virtue of the constitution is that as a lie, it has inspired
people to strive to demand it become true. And slowly by piecemeal, always
hard fought for, always opposed, the golden age of the past that never existed
is being constructed in the present.

~~~
icebraining
Or a descendant of Japanese people:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment>

~~~
AutoCorrect
that mar on our history should be a warning to everyone that wants the
government to provide (whether it be retirement, medical, food, whatever) -
the government giveth, and the government taketh away, as long as we are
unresisting.

~~~
JulianMorrison
You really think it would have helped to resist? In a war?

Also compare the fate of the native Americans who resisted.

------
chris_wot
How can it be legal to have Fourth Amendment Exclusion Zones in the United
States?

------
lifeisstillgood
Any organisation that creates a "Civil Liberties Impact" department, really
needs to think about its basic job function !

Then again, as a UK citizen, I thought the fourth amendment was not letting
soldiers billet in your house.

------
TravisDirks
Population is concentrated on the coasts. Has anyone worked out what fraction
of US Citizens have lost their 4th amendment rights?

~~~
TravisDirks
"Using data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, the ACLU has determined that
nearly 2/3 of the entire US population (197.4 million people) live within 100
miles of the US land and coastal borders."

From:[http://www.aclu.org/national-security_technology-and-
liberty...](http://www.aclu.org/national-security_technology-and-liberty/are-
you-living-constitution-free-zone)

------
OGinparadise
In theory this makes sense: you cross the border...or live near the
border...blah blah...keep US secure...blah blah... In reality, this is the
latest attack and restrictions on our freedoms. Their tactic is brilliant,
they pass xx laws that are unconstitutional and overwhelm the courts. Courts
try to be reasonable and in many cases give half to one side and half to the
other, every year.

I wouldn't be surprised if you still have quite a few rights down the line but
only inside your home and a few decades after that only in the bathroom.

------
IheartApplesDix
What preschooler drew up this idea? Path of Rome, here we come!

