Homeland Security: We can seize laptops for an indefinite period
Declan McCullagh

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has concocted a remarkable new policy: It reserves the right to seize for an indefinite period of time laptops taken across the border.

A pair of DHS policies from last month say that customs agents can routinely--as a matter of course--seize, make copies of, and "analyze the information transported by any individual attempting to enter, re-enter, depart, pass through, or reside in the United States." (See policy No. 1 and No. 2.)

DHS claims the border search of electronic information is useful to detect terrorists, drug smugglers, and people violating "copyright or trademark laws." (Readers: Are you sure your iPod and laptop have absolutely no illicitly downloaded songs? You might be guilty of a felony.)

Read the rest here:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10004646-38.html

------------------------------

Washington Post story is here.

------------------------------

LA Times blog take:
Make no mistake -- Big Brother is watching
1:14 PM, August 1, 2008

They_see_you.... Crossing a border into or out of the U.S.? Newly revealed policies cooked up by Homeland Security mean you have no control over what federal agents can do with your laptop or other electronic gadgets, and they can take them away from you without probable cause, according to a story in the Washington Post.

Federal agents may take a traveler's laptop computer or other electronic device to an off-site location for an unspecified period of time without any suspicion of wrongdoing, as part of border search policies the Department of Homeland Security recently disclosed.

Also, officials may share copies of the laptop's contents with other agencies and private entities for language translation, data decryption or other reasons, according to the policies, dated July 16 and issued by two DHS agencies, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The law covers not only a laundry list of electronic devices like laptops, cellphones, flash drives, beepers, iPods and cassettes, CDs and DVDs, it also applies to "pocket litter." That's right, the papers and books you're carrying, as well as the phone number that cute guy in the LAX bar scribbled on his business card.

Elected officials are having a fit. That sound you hear is George Orwell spinning in his grave, and the Founding Fathers, too.
-- Veronique de Turenne

As we invite the government more and more into our lives, we can expect things like this to happen more frequently.

__________________
ProjectOKC.com

No, Luke, it's when we elect an administration that thinks they are above the Constitution of the United States that we see things like this happen.

Exactly.

When WE allow it to happen, we can expect this to happen more often.

We need less government, not more. That's why I voted for Ron Paul. That is why Bob Barr is looking real good too.

__________________
ProjectOKC.com

Look, there's always going to be border guards - don't kid yourself. That isn't the issue. The issue, again, is what those border guards can and cannot do. The new ruling from the Department of Homeland Security is a shot across the bow of those who give a flip about the constitution. Unreasonable search and seizure is not something that could, in the wildest imagination of any sane person, include a ruling that says, "We can take your laptop (for no reason). We can keep it as long as we like (so don't ask questions). We can share information on your laptop with anyone we like (we said don't ask questions).

It's not about whether the government should have border guards. It's about the power this administration has just handed them.

Agreed.

__________________
ProjectOKC.com

So if I have something to hide, I just mail my hard drive home.

As far as the Constitutional issue, I could definitely argue it both ways. Administrative searches require the court to weigh the individual's privacy interests against the government's regulatory interest.

Usually, the government wins this battle. Besides that, I believe border searches where cars are partially disassembled in searches without probable cause have been upheld. I don't think this would pose much of a problem considering the precedent that's out there.

Considering how easy it is to work around this law, though (mailing your hard drive home instead of hand carrying it), I think I could make a solid argument that the government's regulatory interest here is minimal, and besides that, this is most likely to just annoy and invade the privacy of millions of innocents.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

I'd be interested to know how this might effect a city like San Diego, where every major highway leading out of town has a US Customs checkpoint.

Probably not very much. It's not like this is going to happen to everyone. Just some "randomly" (haha) selected individuals.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

That's fine as long as you aren't the one being "randomly" selected. I don't know about the rest of you, but I can't afford another laptop while they confiscate mine and take their time examining it, and I sure can't afford for them to take my fancy phone. My life is in my phone. If they took it, I'm not sure I'd even know my own address!

Not to worry. I'm sure they can just make a duplicate of your hard drive and send you on your merry way

Like I said, if this is a problem and you're a terrorist, I'm pretty sure no one does random searches of UPS trucks.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

They don't always do that. Sometimes they keep your computer and send you on your merry way.

Good point!

By the way, I've heard they're considering checking mp3 players for pirated music. (as if they had time between ignoring the constitution and intimidating travelers) Beware...

Umm, do you know how long it takes to image a drive? About a gig a minute. That is after they have taken your laptop apart and pulled the drive, hooked it up to their equipment and started the process. 120gb = 120 minutes plus time to tear everything apart and put it back together. They will not duplicate it with cables. Takes too long and doesn't do it right.

It might be ineffecient and pointless to "image" the drive, they might just do what I do and put it in a caddy and copy all the files. Doesn't take long.

At any rate, the issue is not imaging - but confiscation.

If you are going to do that, Then just profile the people with lap tops.

For it to be "confiscation," the taking has to be permanent or for a substantial period of time. In this case, they are duplicating your property and returning it to you. Since you have not been deprived of its use, what's the harm done?

Sovereigns have a vested interest in knowing everything -- including data which passes over their borders. You have almost no expectation of privacy at the border.

Administrative searches are allowable under the Constitution. If they're allowed to almost completely disassemble your car at the border without probable cause, they can do this.

Constitutionally, you really don't have much of a leg to stand on.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

And that would miss everything that was deleted, stored in hidden partitions, or in slack space hence the reason they have to image the drive. Not including making it admissible in court because you have an exact copy of the entire drive, not files from a drive that now have all of their dates changed.

You can preserve dates and stuff when you copy.. but whatever.

Idk, this is supposed to be for "our safety", not to collect evidence to be used against people in court.

This policy would not have stopped the 9-11 terrorist and it isn't going to stop any terrorist in the future. All this is going to do is put a copy of data that is going to be used to hurt an innocent person out there.

I could take an image of your hard drive and find something that would make you look bad 20 years from now...

I pulled this from another board, but it applies here:

The ACLU posted an emailable letter with the subject "Tell Congress to Rein in DHS Travel Abuses." If you click there you can send a customizable email to your US Senators and Representative asking for the following (a partial quote):

Mid,

I think you missed it. That's really the point of the whole story. This is not about just a quick duplication or inspection and you're on your way. They are claiming the right to take your laptop and keep it from you as long as they want -- no reason necessary. Read the original post.....

Homeland Security: We can seize laptops for an indefinite period
Declan McCullagh

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has concocted a remarkable new policy: It reserves the right to seize for an indefinite period of time laptops taken across the border. A pair of DHS policies from last month say that customs agents can routinely--as a matter of course--seize, make copies of, and "analyze the information transported by any individual attempting to enter, re-enter, depart, pass through, or reside in the United States."
-----

As a libertarian, I would think you would be outraged. I have always respected libertarians, of all stripes, for their commitment to personal privacy as really, privacy=freedom.

Well, they can't seize them for an indefinite period of time.

They just can't. They may think they can... but they can't. There's no case that says they have that sort of power and there certainly is this nasty little thing called the 5th Amendment which sort of prevents takings without compensation.

I suppose they're making one of those callous choices that no one is going to spend the requisite cash and time and energy to recover a laptop that's only worth a couple thousand dollars.

As far as "outrage," I don't need to express anything of the sort. I know that if the feds are saying that they can hold my property for an indefinite period of time, that they're just plain wrong and that hopefully, the ACLU will prevail.

The privacy issue, however, is another thing. As a libertarian, there are certain things I wish were true. As someone who knows a thing or two about rights and powers vis a vis the Constitution, I know that there are some things the government has carte blanche to do. Searches and seizures of contraband at the border are exactly such things.

It just now occurs to me that if the laptop contains contraband, it rightfully can be seized as property used in the commission of a crime. That could be the only Constitutional thing Homeland Security could have possibly meant by their statement.

Considering the tone of the article, it doesn't seem unlikely that the author might have slanted a few facts or, himself, suffered from a lack of understanding of Constitutional Law.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

I hate to break it to ya, but they can and they have been. They're doing it, regardless of what the Constitution say, because they've been given permission to do so by our government. That's what's got people so ticked off about all this. And it will continue until someone makes a sufficient challenge to get this to the Supreme Court.

They have? First of all, they "can" and "have been" doing what exactly? Making copies and returning the originals to the users? Or holding onto the laptops indefinitely?

Have you actually read the policy memos? They do not state that there's an "indefinite" period of time, but rather that the agency may only hold the laptops for a "reasonable" amount of time. Original hardware is only seized when absolutely necessary.

What is "reasonable" is a question of fact, but I assume if you have your computer locked down and encrypted 'til hell won't have it, the detention time for your hardware will probably be longer than, say, my law school computer which has nothing of real interest on it.

Wha? First off, you have not shown to me that this has ever happened or that the power is being abused. Not one example.

Secondly, this is not a new grant of power. Homeland Security is merely printing up policies and procedures for dealing with suspected digital contraband. This is merely cataloging and explaining how a certain governmental power (the power to inspect things entering and leaving the country) will be executed. It's high time customs had a policy for dealing with such material. Welcome to the 21st century.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Mid....It's okay! No big deal. You clearly thought one thing when you responded to me above:

"For it to be "confiscation," the taking has to be permanent or for a substantial period of time. In this case, they are duplicating your property and returning it to you. Since you have not been deprived of its use, what's the harm done?"

• They are keeping them for a substantial period of time.

• A person is deprived of its use.

Why not join us in saying it's wrong? Oh, there are a number of examples. NBC talked to dozens of people who have had their laptops taken from them and have yet to see them. One of them was simply frustrated at the long wait and feels he was singled out because he complained.