Unreasonable search and seizure anyone?

[DarrellsMyHero28]

The long period of time is to cover themselves from people who use encryption methods that are extreamly hard to break.

Or abuse their power.

[Fergasun]

Government is just putting their plans in place to stifle the next American Revolution. One man's "terrorist" is another man's "revolutionary"... I'm sure if the current founders were alive they'd be called "jihadi's" and sent to Gitmo. Holding the Federalist Papers' would've been holding jihadi material, on-and-on...

The scary part is that if that were to happen today they would be clamped down on and told to go through the "proper channels" and the people enforcing for our government would be able to say, "I'm just doing my job...". Scary times...

[twa]

So how does this get challenged in court?

It's already been challenged...the courts have upheld it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

the only court to address the Fourth Amendment protections of laptops at the national border held that customs may search any electronic device at the border without any level of suspicion.[17] In United States v. Arnold, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a defendant's contention that search of travelers' files on a laptop computer intrude upon a person's dignity and privacy interests to the same degree as searches of a traveler's body.[18] Instead, the court ruled that searches of electronic materials are legally equivalent to searches of property. As such, Customs' authority to search electronic materials at the border are limited in only two ways: (1) the search may not cause exceptional damage to the property; and (2) the search may not be conducted in "a particularly offensive manner."[19] These restrictions are applicable to all border searches of property.[20] According to Arnold, the characteristics that make electronic storage devices unique, including vast storage capacity and the ability to track its user's habits, tastes, and preferences, are not legally significant. Additionally, the Ninth Circuit held that searching through personal electronic information in a laptop does not constitute an "offensive search."[21]

Although the Supreme Court has not addressed the standard of suspicion necessary for a warrantless border search of electronic materials, the current jurisprudence, guided by Ickes and Arnold suggests that customs agents may search any electronic materials (including laptops, CDs, MP3 players, cellular phones, and digital cameras) randomly, without any suspicion, and without any first amendment restrictions.

[skinfan133]

Please show me where flying is a right. I am not saying I agree with the practice, but airports are not the only place you willingly subject yourself to search. Courthouses, most public buildings, schools all probably have similar rules in place.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

glad to know the constitution is dead

[skinfan133]

The fact also remains that if you leave the contry you submit to seaches of yourself and your luggage.

then in order to avoid searches you have to not travel. either way, your personal liberty is limited by the government in either case.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

It's already been challenged...the courts have upheld it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

the only court to address the Fourth Amendment protections of laptops at the national border held that customs may search any electronic device at the border without any level of suspicion.[17] In United States v. Arnold, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a defendant's contention that search of travelers' files on a laptop computer intrude upon a person's dignity and privacy interests to the same degree as searches of a traveler's body.[18] Instead, the court ruled that searches of electronic materials are legally equivalent to searches of property. As such, Customs' authority to search electronic materials at the border are limited in only two ways: (1) the search may not cause exceptional damage to the property; and (2) the search may not be conducted in "a particularly offensive manner."[19] These restrictions are applicable to all border searches of property.[20] According to Arnold, the characteristics that make electronic storage devices unique, including vast storage capacity and the ability to track its user's habits, tastes, and preferences, are not legally significant. Additionally, the Ninth Circuit held that searching through personal electronic information in a laptop does not constitute an "offensive search."[21]

Although the Supreme Court has not addressed the standard of suspicion necessary for a warrantless border search of electronic materials, the current jurisprudence, guided by Ickes and Arnold suggests that customs agents may search any electronic materials (including laptops, CDs, MP3 players, cellular phones, and digital cameras) randomly, without any suspicion, and without any first amendment restrictions.

Well, the Ninth Circuit is a notoriously conservative court, which is - sorry to say conservative constitutionalists - what this opinion, apparently, stands for.

However, it needs to be challenged in another circuit with a different outcome to get it to the SC, most likely.

Like I said, this is a close call. There's no Amendment that grants unfettered rights. The government has the ability to infringe on your rights in some instances. If you wanted to take the Fourth Amendment as a right incapable of being abridged, then prison is unconstitutional. And of course, we all agree that is ridiculous.

[Baculus]

My sister, when she was recently coming back from France (after a job she had there), at customs had her digital camera taken from her and all of the images that she had taken during her trip were erased by the custom agents.

She is still quite angry about the whole ordeal and losing all of her pictures, including images of our anscetral home in Europe.

[skinfan133]

My sister, when she was recently coming back from France (after a job she had there), at customs had her digital camera taken from her and all of the images that she had taken during her trip were erased by the custom agents.

She is still quite angry about the whole ordeal and losing all of her pictures, including images of our anscetral home in Europe.

airport security has gone way too far these days. employees are grossly imcompetent and unatentive. the invasion of privacy is intolerable, and the big brother feeling behind the whole 'break a few eggs to make an omelet' type policies in effect (your computer being broker or stolen by the government outwieghs your own safety and so forth) are just simply wrong, unconstitutional, and spake of eastern europe during the cold war.

If I had my way, the TSA would be reformed and the DHS would become history

[Baculus]

airport security has gone way too far these days. employees are grossly imcompetent and unatentive. the invasion of privacy is intolerable, and the big brother feeling behind the whole 'break a few eggs to make an omelet' type policies in effect (your computer being broker or stolen by the government outwieghs your own safety and so forth) are just simply wrong, unconstitutional, and spake of eastern europe during the cold war.

If I had my way, the TSA would be reformed and the DHS would become history

I agree with your sentiments.

[Destino]

Please show me where flying is a right. I am not saying I agree with the practice, but airports are not the only place you willingly subject yourself to search. Courthouses, most public buildings, schools all probably have similar rules in place.

Show me where walking is a right? Driving? I guess when you get into a car you lose all protection granted by the bill of rights.

great logic man.

[TimmySmith]

Show me where walking is a right? Driving? I guess when you get into a car you lose all protection granted by the bill of rights.

great logic man.

Try reading down, somebody beat you to it.

[Darth Tater]

Please show me where flying is a right. I am not saying I agree with the practice, but airports are not the only place you willingly subject yourself to search. Courthouses, most public buildings, schools all probably have similar rules in place.

The burden is on you. Show me were flying is specifically said not to be a right?

[Tulane Skins Fan]

The Right to Travel is deemed to be a constitutionally protected right.

[TimmySmith]

The burden is on you. Show me were flying is specifically said not to be a right?

I am unaware of any list anywhere of those things that are not rights.

Tell you what. Next time they tell you to take off your shoes. Tell them they need probable cause, and get back to me.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

I am unaware of any list anywhere of those things that are not rights.

Tell you what. Next time they tell you to take off your shoes. Tell them they need probable cause, and get back to me.

Your comparisons are incredibly weak.