Federal judge: Border searches of cell phones require a warrant (eff.org)

Article summary

A federal judge in New York has ruled that border searches of cell phones require a warrant, absent exigent circumstances. This decision is seen as a significant development in the protection of digital privacy. The ruling applies the logic of the Supreme Court's decision in Riley v. California, which held that police must obtain a warrant to search an arrestee's cell phone. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has been advocating for this position and welcomes the decision.

Main themes

• border searches
• digital privacy
• Constitutional protections
• immigration policy
• civil liberties
• international human rights law

What commenters say

• The requirement to present identification at a border crossing is a well-established practice that is not subject to debate.
• Once a person demonstrates their US citizenship, they should be entitled to the full protection of the Constitution.
• The existence of interior checkpoints where people are asked about their citizenship status is a controversial practice that raises concerns about civil liberties.
• Non-citizens have no inherent right to enter the US, but visitors who are already in the country do have certain rights.
• The UN Declaration of Human Rights does not grant a right to cross borders freely, but rather guarantees freedom of movement within a country's borders.
• Border agents have the authority to refuse entry to non-citizens for any reason, and this power is not limited by the Constitution.
• The concept of 'freedom auditors' is distinct from that of 'sovereign citizens' and involves testing the limits of legal rights in a non-confrontational manner.