Categories
Join Us At:
|
No Liquids, No Shoes, No Privacy at the AirportAmericans have become accustomed to giving up a little privacy, and a lot of convenience, at the border in the name of national security. But when Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) releases a policy (PDF) , as they did in July 2008, which permits officials to subject travelers to suspicionless searches of their laptops, Blackberries, and other electronic devices, we believe that the line between routine and unconstitutional has clearly been crossed. In order to learn more about this alarming policy, the ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request today with CBP, a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), to uncover how these suspicionless searches are threatening the constitutional rights of international travelers. "Based on current CBP policy, we have reason to believe innumerable international travelers — including U.S. citizens — have their most personal information searched by government officials and retained by the government indefinitely," said Larry Schwartztol, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project. "The disclosure of these records is necessary to better understand the extent to which U.S. border and customs officials may be violating the Constitution." Suspicionless searches of laptops and other storage devices raise grave constitutional concerns. For one thing, the sheer quantity of data contained on a laptop or on personal electronic devices means that these searches invade travelers' most intimate personal documents — not to mention sensitive business information routinely transported by executives and lawyers. Do you know anyone whose laptop doesn't contain at least some information they want to keep confidential? Furthermore, by exposing all this information to government review, the policy may deter some travelers from maintaining documents that reflect unpopular or dissenting views, thus chilling the exercise of core First Amendment activities. And removing the requirement that agents first identify a specific basis for suspicion before instituting a search gives border agents unfettered power, which may easily be wielded in a way that discriminates on the basis of national origin or religion. We'll keep you updated on what we learn, and please let us know if your laptop or electronic device has been seized or searched at the border.
We intend the comments portion of this blog to be a forum where you can freely express your views on blog postings and on comments made by other people. Given that, please understand that you are responsible for the material you post on the comments portion of this blog. The only postings that we ask that you refrain from posting and that we cannot permit on our website are requests for legal assistance and postings that could cause ACLU to incur legal liability.
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites. We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published. Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section. 4 Responses to "No Liquids, No Shoes, No Privacy at the Airport" |
|
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
Jun 21st, 2009 at 7:15pm
I have been seached at airports many of times and it doesn't bother me one bit. Simply because I have nothing to hide. It's only those who are trying to smuggle something illegal into the country or someone who would cause harm to American citizens that these searches affects. I drive a school bus for a living, and if I observe someone following me or I see somebody taking pictures of the school grounds or of the children themselves I notify the proper authorities. The majority of the time it's a parent filming their child on their school day, but I don't know that. When the parent finds out I turned them in for what I saw as suspiciouz activity, they have always been grateful that I am looking out for their youngster. The ones who complain that their "rights" were violated are the ones who shouldn't be near a school yard in the first place. I have no problem with these searches if they keep us safe.
Aug 26th, 2009 at 8:04pm
The commenter states he has 'nothing to hide'. Well-good for him.
How about my company secrets? How about pending patents? It is NO ONES business except mine-especially if there is NO suspicion.
BTW-taking pictures or films isn't unlawful-if they are in a PUBLIC place.
People who give up their rights so easily have no idea of how much they may need them later.
Aug 28th, 2009 at 7:48pm
As far as I am concerned a Homeland Security Officer is a stranger unlike anyone else and they have no right to look at private information that is both lawful to carry and important for business transactions. If it is encrypted for your security it just raises more flags for these strangers to invade your private life.
What are next, home invasion and public searches at their liberty?
Aug 31st, 2009 at 11:15pm
Victims of sexual assault have issues with bodily privacy, humiliation and loss of control. Flying will no longer be an option for them. It also will effect mastectomy patients and those who have some kind of implants that will set off alarms. when the airline industry starts realizing why they're losing money, see how fast they get rid of the x ray technology and random searches.