Thread

1. jmclnx · 1789742712 · focus · HN ↗

   The article is not that clear in one way. Does this only apply to non-US Citizens ?

   1. tocs3 · 1789743228 · focus · HN ↗

      Near the top of the article:

      “Today’s decision leaves Americans’ most sensitive information open to search at the border without any suspicion at all,”

      I think this is just an extension of a general we, as government officials protecting American freedoms, can do what we want and will justify it later if we have to policy.

      It should probably be noted that this specific case led to a conviction of an actual crime (Bank fraud and money laundering).

      1. samus · 1789752532 · focus · HN ↗

         > It should probably be noted that this specific case led to a conviction of an actual crime (Bank fraud and money laundering).

         That's pretty much irrelevant to the discussion. Of course a lot more crimes would get prosecuted if we lived in a total police state.

         1. tocs3 · 1789770431 · focus · HN ↗

            I think it is important because the case was not about guilt or innocence. It was about the governments right to search without any cause. If the case was about whether there was enough cause for the search we would be having a much different discussion here.

            I should probably have said this in my original comment.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.