American bloke hauls US govt into court after border cops 'cuffed him, demanded he unlock his phone at airport' A California man is suing the US government for civil rights violations after he was apparently detained and forced to unlock his phone at an American airport. Haisam Elsharkawi, a US citizen, claims he was cuffed, hauled away, and grilled by border officers until he agreed to surrender his smartphone. The unlocked device was …
No, the government doesn't "have the option of allowing it to be sued".
Article III, Section 2: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;-to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public ministers and Consuls;-to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;-to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;-to Controversies between two or more States;-between a State and Citizens of another State;-between Citizens of different States;-between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
So the judicial power of the Supreme Court and its inferior courts apply to controversies to which the United States is a party.
HOWEVER, there are sometimes statutory "kill switches" that can be used to shut down certain actions, but a challenge based on the Bill of Rights will likely proceed at least to the point where the government gets an opportunity to articulate, say, the existence of a "reasonable suspicion".
"The US Government has the option of allowing it to be sued"
erm... citation needed? I thought the law courts there were pretty independent and take a very dim view of government interference. I don't think US gov can seriously claim this as a matter of national security, when it's clearly some border agents pushing the line too far because usually very few people push back.
You can't sue the United States government itself without its consent, but you can sue many of its officers, e.g., cabinet secretaries, who essentially stand proxy for the government. Here, the nominal defendant would very likely be the Secretary of Homeland Security. There's also precedent for a direct action under the Constitution against the officers themselves. As for the plaintiff's odds of prevailing -- regardless of his cause of action or whom he sues -- I get the feeling that, apart from the 9th Circuit (maybe), today's federal bench considers the Bill of Rights "quaint and antiquated," like the Geneva Conventions, our various antitrust statutes, class actions, and consumer protection in general.
That's the way America has always worked.
This is not the America I grew up with. This has been introduced in the 1990s with the advent of terrorism. Before that, the United States was always a "don't tread on me" and they will leave your country alone. Thanks to "terrorism", now almost every country in the whole world has the same "terroristic" mentality and limiting laws as the United States.
I couldn't even take an almost empty tube of toothpaste out of Heathrow last month, because the pack size was over 100ml.
I rest my case.
Real slick of them to get themselves a law that allows searching people leaving, since that may someone magically allow terrorists in. I knew law was blind, but direction?
It's understandable. They checking to see if someone boarding the aircraft has malicious intent to either blow it up or hijack it and crash it into something.
"It's understandable. They checking to see if someone boarding the aircraft has malicious intent to either blow it up or hijack it and crash it into something."
---
Using a smartphone and $2500 of currency?
Every passenger goes through the anti-explosive material checks anyway. I couldn't even take an almost empty tube of toothpaste out of Heathrow last month, because the pack size was over 100ml.
Once the borderoids had established he wasn't carrying the materials or weapons to endanger the aircraft then there is no threat.
Using a smartphone and $2500 of currency?Once the borderoids had established he wasn't carrying the materials or weapons to endanger the aircraft then there is no threat.
But there's still $2500 left on the table. Sorry, we suspect that money is going to be used for nefarious purposes and will seize it until you can prove otherwise. Then the agency gets to keep the cash or goods, and uses or auctions them off later. As we're nudged towards being a cashless society, cash users stand out as easy marks. I guess when border inspections are privatised, the ability to confiscate traveller's cash will help make those services self-funding, or more profitable.
For me, the outrage is not being forced to surrender a non-existent Facepalm login, it's being expected to surrender any presumption of innocence.
So they should start from the pilots and then all of the cabin crew and passengers? They still need a reasonable suspicion. Is going to Saudi Arabia for a pilgrimage to the Mecca enough?
I personally found all pilgrimages quite stupid as they are echoes of ancient superstitions believing some places and items are more "magic" than others (and very useful to make real money from them), but it looks they are common in any religion - thereby as long as they're protected by explicit constitutional norms, it's hard to tread them as reasonable suspicions.
oh yeah like your password of "jihad" and your facebook page honoring Osama bin Laden are some kind of clue that you're a terrorist. So they look for that to keep you off of airplanes.
[seriously those wannabe types leave rat droppings all over the place, no need to use their phone passwords to spy on them like that, just do simple search engine queries and they'll pop up from time to time so you'll know who they are - use existing laws to get user info from the service providers and a warrant to spy on their activity, and you're all set]
As for the REAL terrorists and spies, they're hiding in plain site and look JUST! LIKE! EVERYBODY! ELSE! and you can't find them by insisting on getting their phones unlocked at an airport.
Next time I fly with a computer, I'll set it up with FreeBSD and I won't encrypt the hard drive. I'll just make sure that it boots into a console and that EVERY virtual console goes to a JAIL. And the root password in the jail will be something like "TSA Sucks".
[its easy to get from a jail to the host; just run ssh to localhost and log in with the host's security, then you can use 'startx' to get the GUI etc. and it'll be fine]
So [b]lame, "them" and their attempts to control and spy on us. TSA and FISA need a _BIG_ _REVIEW_ anyway, and hopefully that will be on Trump's plate in his 2nd term. Under GW Bush (whose administration invented TSA) everybody expressed their concerns that it would get "this bad", eventually. Under Obama it *DID* get "this bad". It hasn't gotten (perceptively) better under Trump, though I think to some extent it [independently] HAS gotten 'less bad'. Let's see how it goes.
Seriously I want things the way they were pre-9/11. Smarter scanning methods, and PROFILING, is more likely to get us there than the current "take of your belt and shoes and hold onto your pants so you don't flash everyone whle you're being scanned" method. And oh, by the way, give up your passwords, too.
post-note - I've been 'more thoroughly examined' at the Mexican border before, car seats removed and left for me to put back, etc. - I had a big car with a big trunk, and so they 'profiled' me for a bit of 'extra' inspection. Whatever, yeah. The agents were polite and it didn't take that long, but yeah, it was kinda 'a pain in the ass'.
"Citizen or alien, agents can rifle through your stuff if you're within 100 miles of the border, and without a warrant"
They say they can, but it's simply that nobody has actually contested it.
And "within 100 miles of the border" is a huge chunk of the population, too. For example, since they consider the coastline to be a border, that's almost 100% of Florida and 90% of the population of New York and California.
"asked if he was under arrest, and if he needed a lawyer [...] was told no" is what I've always been told means you're free to go in so many words. That's the legal question you're advised to ask the police or whoever is holding you, and it's very important. That's going to go a long way towards illegal detention there.
You are forgetting that ANY international arrival point is technically surrounded by a "border", which is why you have to go through inspection and custom. So this little gem includes areas 100 miles from ANY airport that allows international flights to land/depart (including tiny local airports).
More disturbingly, this seems to happen much more frequently if you're not old, white and/or Republican.
And, if we allow it to continue, that may very well change. These officers were abusing their authority and need to be held to account. We like to think they are trained, objective professionals, but too many of them are drunk with power and enjoy the ability to wield their authority with no consequences. That sets a bad precedent, and needs to be firmly stopped.
Otherwise, see icon.
They could detain you in the same manner as this guy and keeping asking why your phone and laptop are wiped, and insinuate you are hiding some type of crime and demand that you restore the proper config so they can snoop.
You are missing the point if you think this is about them snooping your stuff. Your "yes sir" attitude no matter what they do makes the problem WORSE, don't you see that? People need to fight this bullshit or it will only continue to escalate! The snooping is really a minor part of it as far as I'm concerned, of far greater concern is:
1) they "detained" him and even cuffed him but said he wasn't under arrest - and because he wasn't under arrest he wasn't permitted to contact an attorney
2) he was LEAVING the US, so they can hardly argue this is about securing America's borders
3) he's a natural born US citizen, likely singled out because he's muslim - but if they can do this to him, they can do this to an ordinary white guy like me if they feel like it
I have been (briefly) detained in the past and never had any problems other than a delay. If you read the story, and you live in the US, then you'll see that all of the issues came up after he followed your suggestions.
And yes, they can do all this to US citizens and if you take your attitude up with them I doubt that we'll see you here in the comment section for a while.
"If everyone had your attitude, the British would still rule India and black people would still get lynched in Mississippi."
Doesn't always work. Look what happened in the Middle East. It's like why Agateans in the late Terry Pratchett's Interesting Times never noticed anyone on horseback: anyone who did died. Similarly, if the customary response to someone resisting a jackboot is a bullet or 10 to the brain, people start preferring the jackboot. Always be wary of someone who is ready to say, "Well, if that's the way YOU want it..."
I always travel with a clean laptop & phone, have for almost 20 years.
Why? Because I don't trust anyone, particularly hotel staff. Getting my laptop stolen would be a nightmare for work reasons. Getting my phone stolen might lead to all sorts of identity theft problems I don't want to deal with.
No need to hide anything - I just don't want to deal with the consequences of having stuff stolen.
- No you are not under arrest. No you may not see a lawyer. Yes you did provide us with the code to open your laptop, but you'll have to provide us the code to your well-encrypted cloud storage container as well - national security you understand. No you may not use the toilet.
"Clean laptop and phone"
Why? Because I don't trust anyone, particularly hotel staff. Getting my laptop stolen would be a nightmare for work reasons. Getting my phone stolen might lead to all sorts of identity theft problems I don't want to deal with.
What does that entail exactly? you wipe the phone book? so you cant ring anyone? you remove all work from your work laptop? surely your work laptop is encrypted so if its stolen - no data issue
Phones can also be encypted and not even reusable with a wipe/format to a thief - why not do that?
While US law formally grants the same rights to residents and citizens, and 'bill of rights' issues grant same rights to anyone 'just visiting', in practice citizens get better treatment than residents, who get better treatment than visitors.
As a non-US citizen I would just say yes, sir to any reasonable requests. But this guy, being a US citizen and also clearly clued-up to his rights (eg asking "am I under arrest, do I need a lawyer") quite justifiably stood his ground and had every expectation that the border officers would not overstep their mark.
The border officers clearly didn't know where their limit was (possibly exactly because everyone else just says "yes, sir"). And let's face it, has anyone ever heard of a similair story where the US citizen in question was a white guy called John Smith rather than someone with and Egyptian* descent and name. There's no direct indication of racism, but as the Italians say "to think badly of someone is sinful but many times you get it right"
*and by the way I wouldn't trust US border officers to know the difference between Egyptian and Arab
@werdsmith
I also travel to the Us to see [British] friends who live there and while I've never had a problem, my luggage has been searched entering and leaving on each and every occasion.
last year it was searched when I changed 'planes at San Francisco on my way to New Zealand and at Miami on my way back.
TBF, My luggage was also searched by NZ border on teh same trip and I've been searched *every single* European trip I've ever made.
I must look like some kind of major crim
I've no reason to disbelieve you, I just can't think what I'm supposed to do with that information. You haven't had a problem, this guy has, therefore it seems, some people, sometimes experience a problem. That problem should be highlighted, discussed, put into context, investigated etc. which is what's happening here. I would hope that having been called on this, the response of the TSA is not simply that "sometimes, some people don't experience a problem".
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
