as far as I understand, they were not there to serve a warrant. he was crossing a border and the feds are claiming that the 4th amendment doesn’t apply because he hadn’t yet crossed into America.

border patrol was essentially using a loophole to preemptively collect potential evidence (they’ll figure out what to charge him with after they see his phone contents). he’s a political activist against a cop city, they were obviously trying to do him dirty.

they were not serving a search warrant. they were abusing what should be an illegal search at the border in order to silence those who speak out against govt overreach.

If he wasnt in the US how can the US claim he violated a US law?

The US claims jurisdiction over its citizens wherever they are.

Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, because it means you can be prosecuted in the US for stuff like going to Thailand and sexually abusing children there.

So the law applies, but protection under the law does not.

Isn’t all law essentially derived from powers granted by the constitution?

If the powers granted by it to enforce a law are applicable when not within the US then then it very reasonably ought to apply to any and all amendments.

But, reason is on the extinction list with the magafascists. (And all LEO)

Are we reading the same article?

The incident took place at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson airport in January 2025

In addition, the law that he’s charged with relates to knowingly destroying property that the police have a warrant to sieze.

There is no precedent of it being applied to border searches where they may not even have reasonable suspicion of a crime and can stop people for questioning on a whim.

The State has absolutely no claim over your personal property at that point and destroying property that the police hope and dream of siezing isn’t the same as destroying property where they’ve demonstrated probable cause to a judge.

This argument from the border patrol that you can be arrested for destroying data that is in your possession without ever been given due process and 4th amendment protections isn’t supported by precedence.

These fucking conservatives crawl out of the woodwork like cockroaches anytime the government does something heinous and use their piss poor understanding of EVERYTHING to try to justify the heinous actions. It happens every time, and I wish just once to see one of them use real and relevant facts, just so I can pretend that these people live in reality for just one second.

Hasn’t happened yet though.

Everything is a conspiracy theory when you don’t understand how anything works.

So the important takeaway is to delete your phone before customs. Presumably you have an encrypted backup you can restore without too much effort

Finally a sensible reply. Quite a few NAZI bootlickers here. They’re the first the sign up it seems.

Good to know thanks

This also includes “when entering the country”. It always has. There’s nothing new here. There are so many things the current administration does to violate rights and due process, but this isn’t one of them.

Have to disagree with that one. Simply entering a country is not justification for searching someones phone. I don’t care what the law says. People have a right to privacy.

Not since 2001 they don’t.

They do, just because the government says otherwise doesn’t make it true.

Yes, it does. Thats what governance means.

I’m not saying I agree with it, just that it’s always been so

There are so many things the current administration does to violate rights and due process, but this isn’t one of them.

You literally said they are not violating rights by doing this.

He’s saying that right was taken away by George W Bush.

Governments cannot take rights away. They can only infringe upon them. They are rights. Not privileges.

Then clearly you’re talking about deontological rights and they’re talking about legal rights and both wasting your breath

That should have been obvious by the fact that I said I don’t care about the laws.

That’s how it should be. But that’s not what the law says.

I don’t care what the law says. People have a right to privacy.