‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Border agents can search cellphones without a warrant or reasonable suspicion

235 points · 198 comments · mmh0000

  1. mmh0000 · · focus · HN ↗
    It is insane to me that judges consistently rule that the constitution doesn't apply because there's a "border" within 100 miles.

    The 4th Amendment says, exactly:

       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.
    
    I do not know how that could be unclear. My cellphone is my effect, and arguably, also a "paper". Which SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED. But apparently, I'm too dumb to understand the sentence[1].

    [1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Border_search_exception" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United...

    1. mywittyname · · focus · HN ↗
      We gave the government the ability to police itself and there&#x27;s no punishments for poor rulings.

      The structure of the Supreme Court is foolish. It made sense initially, having the people who drafted the constitution adjudicate it. But I think it would be better to drop SCOTUS all together, letting the Federal courts sort out their disagreements via consensus. Or have a review panel setup like the House (elected, population based) who have the ability to override rulings and censure&#x2F;discipline judges who make poor rulings.

      Either way, we need more people involved in the process.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.