Greyhound Finally Bans CBP, Border Patrol From Suspicionless Searches Of Its Buses And Passengers

from the bus-operator-boards-the-ban-bus dept

Greyhound has finally, definitively decided to stop serving up its customers to US border agencies.

A week ago, a CBP memo obtained by the Associated Press made something clear to CBP agents that should have been clear all along: they could not perform sweeps of buses without the permission of the bus driver or the bus company itself. Unfortunately, this means a bus driver can consent to a search on behalf of passengers, but it still was better than Greyhound's stance. The company had stated that it believed it could not legally refuse to allow CBP officers to board buses.

This was a problem. CBP officers were wandering far inland to perform searches, often targeting buses that never crossed a border. Anything within 100 miles of a border was considered fair game and reports of bus sweeps by CBP agents were trickling down from depots near the nation's northern borders -- far away from the supposedly deeply-troubled southern border where the current president believes more walls are needed to stop drugs, terrorism, and the possibility of being unable to secure an existence for whites and their progeny.

Greyhound was wrong and the CBP memo confirmed it. But Greyhound still refused to issue a blanket refusal on behalf of its drivers, many of who would probably feel (individually) it was perhaps unwise -- if not illegal -- to tell CBP agents to perform their fishing expeditions elsewhere.

The company has finally taken a stand, making it much easier for drivers to refuse access to their buses.

In an emailed statement, the company said it would notify the Department of Homeland Security that it does not consent to unwarranted searches on its buses or in areas of terminals that are not open to the public — such as company offices or any areas a person needs a ticket to access.

Greyhound said it would provide its drivers and bus station employees updated training regarding the new policy, and that it would place stickers on all its buses clearly stating that it does not consent to the searches.

This is the right step to take, although it would have been better to do it as soon as it became obvious the company had the right to refuse warrantless, suspicionless searches of its buses and passengers. With this in place, the company's statements that it cares about the safety and security of its drivers and customers are a whole lot less empty.

The sad fact is this never should have come to this point. It's highly presumptuous of these agencies (CBP, Border Patrol) to believe they can just board buses and search passengers when the targeted buses aren't at checkpoints or crossing borders. This is the sort of thing we should be above -- something only heard about from other countries without enshrined rights and protections. Emulating Cold War Russia and its eastern bloc subsidiaries is a piss poor look for US government agencies operating dozens of miles away from any border in need of securing.

Filed Under: 4th amendment, buses, cbp, ice, searches
Companies: greyhound

CBP Memo Confirms Bus Drivers Have A Right To Deny Agents Permission To Search Buses And Passengers

from the Greyhound-rings-in-with-the-loudest-of-'no-comments' dept

Customs and Border Protection has confirmed that its agents can't legally do one of things they've been doing pretty regularly. Under Trump, the CBP has stepped up its sweeps of mass transportation, targeting buses operated by Greyhound and others.

These searches are happening as far inland as the law allows, up to 100 miles from any border (and, technically, any international airport). This isn't just happening near the southern border. Travelers in New York and Maine have reported being questioned and otherwise harassed by CBP agents, who have been given permission to search buses by drivers.

According to a memo obtained by the Associated Press, CBP does not actually have the legal authority to conduct sweeps of public transportation.

The memo obtained by the AP was dated Jan. 28, addressed to all chief patrol agents and signed by then-Border Patrol Chief Carla Provost just before she retired. It confirms the legal position that Greyhound’s critics have taken: that the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment prevents agents from boarding buses and questioning passengers without a warrant or the consent of the company.

“When transportation checks occur on a bus at non-checkpoint locations, the agent must demonstrate that he or she gained access to the bus with the consent of the company’s owner or one of the company’s employees,” the memo states. An agent’s actions while on the bus “would not cause a reasonable person to believe that he or she is unable to terminate the encounter with the agent.”

Sadly, this means one person's consent trumps the rights of every person on the bus. And this memo conflicts with statements made both by the CBP and representatives for Greyhound, the latter of which have routinely insisted they have no right to deny CBP access to buses.

Border Patrol officials claim they always ask for consent from drivers. Even if this is true (and it probably isn't), there's little to indicate the actions taken by agents once on a bus would make it clear to passengers that any questioning or searches are optional.

Last year, Greyhound said it could not refuse entry to federal officers. Spokespeople went so far as to suggest people (like ACLU reps) saying it did have a choice were being "false and tendentious." Well, it's now clear who's going to be false and tendentious if bus drivers continue to let the CBP search their vehicles (and their vehicles' occupants). The company already seems to be stepping out on the "false" limb, insisting it has always been opposed to the sweeps it has never opposed:

Greyhound said that it appreciated the Border Patrol “clarifying” its policy. “We were unaware of USBP’s memo clarifying their practices regarding transportation and bus check operations,” the company said. “We are pleased there appears to be greater context about these practices as we have publicly stated we do not consent to these searches and maintain that position.”

To reverse this, Greyhound needs to make an affirmative statement that it categorically does not consent to bus searches and post signage that allows the company to speak for its drivers when drivers might feel pressured by federal agents to ignore company policy.

So far, Greyhound has done nothing to make it clear its anti-sweep. Jeremy Stahl of Slate tried to get a direct answer from the company and got some runaround and deflection instead.

When I asked Tricia Martinez on Friday if she maintained the legal position that “Greyhound cannot deny Customs and Border Protection (CBP) access to its buses,” she told me, “I’m maintaining the position that you need to call our communications specialist.”

Greyhound’s communications specialist informed Slate that “[t]he company will not be providing any statements at this time.” Greyhound is being sued in California by a U.S. citizen for allegedly allowing CBP to racially profile its passengers.

Despite the use of Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection officers, this tactic sometimes doesn't seem to have much to do with patrolling and protecting borders. The AP reports arrests in Spokane, Washington area (nearly 100 miles from the Canadian border) more than doubled from 2017 to 2019, despite the fact no Greyhound lines operating from that terminal cross international borders. A recent experience related by comedian Mohanad Elshieky detailed the CBP's boarding of his bus in Spokane -- one that culminated in agents unilaterally declaring he was in country illegally despite verifying both his work permit and license were valid.

Until Greyhound joins other bus lines in denouncing CBP sweeps and promising to protect their customers from suspicionless searches, the agency will continue to target these passengers. If you want your rights asserted on your behalf, you're better off with a competitor.

Filed Under: 4th amendment, buses, cbp
Companies: greyhound