nat'l security is vital.

On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 5:23:37 PM UTC-6, Travis wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>  
>
> http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/12/gadget-border-searches-2/
> Court Upholds Willy-Nilly Gadget Searches Along U.S. Border
>
> A federal judge today upheld a President Barack Obama administration 
> policy allowing authorities along the U.S. border to seize and search 
> laptops, smartphones and other electronic devices for any reason.
>
> The 
> decision<https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/abidor_decision.pdf> 
> (.pdf) 
> by U.S. District Judge Edward Korman in New York comes as laptops, and now 
> smartphones, have become virtual extensions of ourselves, housing 
> everything from email to instant-message chats to our papers and effects.
>
> The American Civil Liberties Union brought the 
> challenge<http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/laptop-border-searches/>nearly
>  three years ago, claiming U.S. border officials should have 
> reasonable suspicion to search gadgets along the border because of the data 
> they store. But Judge Korman said the so-called “border exemption,” in 
> which people can be searched for no reason at all along the border, 
> continues to apply in the digital age.
>
> Alarmingly, the government contends the Fourth-Amendment-Free Zone stretches 
> 100 miles inland from the nation’s actual 
> border<http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/10/aclu-assails-10/>
> .
>
> The judge said it “would be foolish, if not irresponsible” to store 
> sensitive information on electronic devices while traveling internationally.
>
> Korman ruled:
>
> Laptops have only come into widespread use in the twenty-first century. 
> Prior to that time, lawyers, photographers, and scholars managed to travel 
> overseas and consult with clients, take photographs, and conduct scholarly 
> research. No one ever suggested the possibility of a border search had a 
> chilling effect on his or her First Amendment rights. While it is true that 
> laptops may make overseas work more convenient, the precautions plaintiffs 
> may choose to take to ‘mitigate’ the alleged harm associated with the 
> remote possibility of a border search are simply among the many 
> inconveniences associated with international travel.
>
> The ACLU said it was mulling an appeal.
>
> “We’re disappointed in today’s decision, which allows the government to 
> conduct intrusive searches of Americans’ laptops and other electronics at 
> the border without any suspicion that those devices contain evidence of 
> wrongdoing,” said Catherine Crump, the American Civil Liberties Union 
> attorney who argued the case in July 2011. “Suspicionless searches of 
> devices containing vast amounts of personal information cannot meet the 
> standard set by the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches 
> and seizures. Unfortunately, these searches are part of a broader pattern 
> of aggressive government surveillance that collects information on too many 
> innocent people, under lax standards, and without adequate oversight.”
>
> The case was brought on behalf of 29-year-old Pascal Abidor, whose laptop 
> was seized for 11 as he was traveling by rail from Canada to his parents’ 
> New York residence in 2010. He was an Islamic studies graduate student in 
> Canada.
>
> At an Amtrak inspection point, he showed his U.S. passport to an agent. He 
> was ordered to move to the cafe car, where they removed his laptop from his 
> luggage and “ordered Mr. Abidor to enter his password,” according to the 
> lawsuit.
>
> Agents asked him about pictures they found on his laptop, which included 
> Hamas and Hezbollah rallies. He explained to the agent that he was earning 
> a doctoral degree in the modern history of Shiites in Lebanon.
>
> He was handcuffed and then jailed for three hours while the authorities 
> looked through his computer, according to the suit. Numerous agents 
> questioned him, the suit says.
>
> They released him and kept his laptop, until his lawyer complained.
>
> Plaintiffs in the suit also include the National Association of Criminal 
> Defense Lawyers and the National Press Photographers Association. The 
> lawyers’ group maintains search policy exposes privileged communications. 
> The photographers say the policy interferes “with their ability to do their 
> work.”
>
> The decision supports a conclusion 10 months ago from the Department of 
> Homeland Security’s civil rights watchdog that said that travelers along 
> the nation’s borders may have their electronics seized and the contents 
> of those devices examined for any reason 
> whatsoever<http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/02/electronics-border-seizures/>—
>  all in the name of national security.
>
> The President George W. Bush administration first announced the 
> suspicionless, electronics search rules in 2008. The Obama administration 
> followed up with virtually the same rules a year later. Between 2008 and 
> 2010, 6,500 persons had their electronic devices searched along the U.S. 
> border, according to DHS data.
>  
>
> __._,_.___
>   
>
>
>             
>
> __,_._,___
>
>
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to