Your Papers, Sir: Expanded Border Search Powers for USA

by Jordan Yerman | September 24, 2008 at 06:13 am
501 views | 27 Recommendations | 7 comments

Apparently having never heard of email, the Department of Homeland Security has quietly expanded its search-and siezure mandate from electronic devices to paper documents. Basically, any visitor to the USA is now subject to having his or her books/notebooks/work material siezed with no reasonable cause, and good luck getting 'em back.

Can anyone think of any reason why any malefactor would physically carry anything incriminating over a border, rather than mailing or emailing it, because I cannot. This rule only punishes law-abiding visitors with the wrong surname or skin-tone, and further diminishes the American reputation abroad.

I'm a US citizen living abroad, and I refuse to bring my personal laptop back to the States, since, if I miss shaving for half an hour, I tend to get "randomly" selected for search. That means I'm stuck using a cruddy XP machine with poor power management instead of my trusty (but admittedly old) iBook.

Recently obtained documents show that last year the Department of Homeland Security quietly reversed a two-decades-old policy that restricted customs agents from reading and copying the personal papers carried by travelers, including U.S. citizens. The documents were made public today by the Asian Law Caucus (ALC) and Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which sued the government under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to obtain policies governing the searches and questioning of travelers at the nation’s borders.

The documents show that in 2007, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) loosened restrictions on the examination of travelers' documents and papers that had existed since 1986. While CBP agents could previously read travelers' documents only if they had "reasonable suspicion" that the documents would reveal violations of agency rules, in 2007 officers were given the power to "review and analyze" papers without any individualized suspicion. Furthermore, whereas CBP agents could previously copy materials only where they had "probable cause" to believe a law had been violated, in 2007 they were empowered to copy travelers' papers without suspicion of wrongdoing and keep them for a "reasonable period of time" to conduct a border search. The new rules applied to physical documents as well as files on laptop computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices.

Compared to searching through and copying your hard drive, this may seem like a minor deal, but it's yet another example of DHS expanding its authority in ways that are very likely to be abused.
The Department of Homeland Security has some tenuous reasoning for why this is necessary, though those arguments are knocked over with relative ease:

The article trots out James Jay Carafano from the Heritage Foundation with a couple of interesting statements. Let's take them in order. First:

"The idea that we would create some kind of sanctuary for criminals and terrorists to carry things across the border to me is absolutely ludicrous."

Well, that's not just an exaggeration, it's wrong. Does Carafano actually believe that someone manually walking a laptop across the border is the only way that data gets across the border? Of course that's not true. Data flows across borders via the network all the time -- with no customs review whatsoever. No one is walking across the border with a laptop thinking that's the best way to get some data across the border. Then there's this statement:

"It's also unrealistic to require probable cause when you think about the millions of people a day who come in and go out of the country."

Let's just change a few words in that statement and see how Carafano feels about it: "It's also unrealistic to require probable cause when you think about the millions of people a day who walk up and down the streets of America." Yet, we don't hear Carafano pushing for a removal of probable cause for searches on the street, do we?

This could have a chilling effect on business travel, since teleconferencing involves less hassle, and less risk to confidential info.

Advertisement
recommend This comment thread is now closed
0
NationalSecurity

Unless of course the United States 'west' is not on the internet at all.

Unless someone can come up with another reason for them not being concerned. We would have to say, with all the other proof, that the Citizens of the United States and it's allies, are not on the Internet at all, but like China, Controlled inTRAnets.

Karen Hatter
Karen Hatter
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 06:22 on September 24th, 2008

Jordan, so a little less than '5 o'clock' shadow equals "Please, profile me!", huh? Amazing!

dunkelberg
dunkelberg
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 06:34 on September 24th, 2008

Mark my words, Mr. Harper and his Bush-wannabes will be following suit on the Canadian side soon.

We no longer have open borders and that goes both ways. 

0
CJaye

Well Jordan if your a citizen of the United States then you should know that people still do carry paper documents here in the US. It's something that is called a back up!  It use to be the main source of getting info out in the spy world along with micro chip and stuff.  You carry a Passport don't you or is that in "your" laptop? The Bashing of the US has got to stop! Also if you had Major Buildings in Major Cities completely destroyed. The Two Towers, I don't have to say anymore.  Hundreds of innocent people died for no reason. A plane went down in PA 40 life's lost trying to stop hijackering terrorist. We have no reason? What about the plane at the Pentagon how many did we loose there? So if papers are overly checked, taken and copied also hard drives copied, oh well.  We'd rather be safe than sorry.

 

0
Jordan Yerman

Though I travel with a US passport (the US-citizen-living-abroad situation never fails to confuse the immigration officers for some reason, even though they're in the same boat as me), it has no apparent effect on how often I'm searched. In all fairness, I'm singled out in the UK as well. I guess I'm scarier-looking that I realize.

Barbara McPherson
Barbara McPherson
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 11:17 on September 24th, 2008

jordan, I like this story. It's good stuff.  I read an article in the Guardian a few months ago.  It was a primer for turning a democracy into a fascist state.  The first thing you do is have the population afraid.  Then they will gradually give up rights for safety.  The use of passenger planes as weapons was a terrible thing and many innocent people were killed BUT put it in perspective.  Many people are killed in and by moving vehicles every day, month, year yet we wouldn't agree to give up our drivers' licenses.  The US power people are great pals with the House of Saud, cause they have the oil.  The majority of the plane hijackers were Saudis, the Bin Laden family(Saudi) was in residence of the US at the time of 9/11 and the power people allowed them to leave the country by plane when the airports were shut down, before the FBI could question them.  So one has to ask if the power people in the US are serious about fighting terrorism.  You'll find your answer by following the money.

Rhonda J Mangus
Rhonda J Mangus
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 12:36 on September 24th, 2008

jordan, I like this story. It's good stuff.

This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from