ACLU Looking To Challenge Homeland Security On Border Laptop Searches
from the gotta-find-someone-first... dept
Slashdot points us to the news that the ACLU is looking to challenge Homeland Security's policies that it has pretty free reign in searching your laptop at the border. Now, to date, the courts have said that this is perfectly legal, so it's not clear what is "new" that the ACLU hopes to prove. However, last year, after revealing that the new administration still stood by these border computer searches, it also revealed some data on laptop searches, suggesting they are quite rare -- but do still happen. However, the ACLU is seeking people whose laptops were searched, but that looks like a pretty small number of people. While I agree that these searches seem quite questionable for a variety of reasons, I just don't see this lawsuit being effective.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: border search, homeland security, laptops
Companies: aclu
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wrong group
Dump it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wrong group
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Question regarding encryption
Are you required to actually login to your OS [for OS level encryption], or into any addon-encrypted repositories stored on the device?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Encryption
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes, much better to bend over and accept the erosion of your civil rights and the slow construction of a police state around you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm no fan of the ACLU, but sometimes, they do the right thing. Let's just say we get another Richard Nixon in the White House, and certain journalists, legal experts, satirists and educators from inside and outside the US are analyzing, criticizing and investigating the American political situation. Someone needs to stand up to the government now, before they are granted blanket powers of search and seizure in the name of national and border security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Unclear Legal Battle
Those who have privileged and confidential info on their laptops -- like the lawyers this suit seeks to represent -- should be using strong encryption as a matter of course. This is especially true when they do things which might result in someone searching their laptop: like crossing a border which has an explicit policy of doing so.
Given the precedents, and the legal basis of that jurisprudence, it seems quite an odd case to pursue. It's not clear to me what legal argument might have even a moderate chance of success in this case. Perhaps the ACLU has an ace up their sleeve? Perhaps they know that they'll lose, but want to draw attention to the issue as a matter of public policy?
This case looks interesting, not because it seems like an effective challenge against a draconian policy, but because I want to know just what the ACLU is planning.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Unclear Legal Battle
Granted, Boucher was a moron, but it's not a far stretch to imagine the court granting a motion to compel you to enter your passphrase if the border guards have even a vague guess that your encrypted drive contains anything illegal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]