United States v. Arnold

"United States v. Arnold" is a legal case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not require government agents to have reasonable suspicion before searching laptops or other digital devices at the border, including international airports. [ [http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6D5D931898D8168188257432005AC9B8/$file/0650581.pdf?openelement United States v. Arnold] ]

The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed an amicus brief in the case, arguing that “laptop searches are so revealing and invasive that the Fourth Amendment requires agents to have some reasonable suspicion to justify the intrusion.” [ [http://www.eff.org/cases/us-v-arnold EFF: US v. Arnold] ]

DHS policies after "Arnold"

On August 1, 2008, the "Washington Post" reported that Department of Homeland Security policies allow federal agents to “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.”cite news |first=Ellen |last=Nakashima |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=Travelers' Laptops May Be Detained At Border: No Suspicion Required Under DHS Policies |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080103030.html |work=Washington Post |publisher= |date=2008-08-01 |accessdate= ] Further, “officials may share copies of the laptop's contents with other agencies and private entities for language translation, data decryption or other reasons.” Senator Russell Feingold called these policies “truly alarming” and said that he intends to introduce legislation soon that would require reasonable suspicion for border searches, as well as prohibit profiling on race, religion or national origin. Meanwhile Ryan Singel of Wired.com recommended putting one's electronics and papers “in a first class U.S. mail envelope and stamp it—or even better mail it to yourself before the trip,” [ [http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/08/border-laptop-s.html Wired.com: Threat Level: Border Laptop Searches? No Reason Needed] ] since ‘officers may not read or permit others to read correspondence contained in sealed letter class mail (the international equivalent of First Class) without an appropriate search warrant or consent’. However, this only applies to articles in the postal system, not to letters carried by individuals or private carriers such as DHL, UPS, or FedEx. [ [http://customs.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/admissability/search_authority.ctt/search_authority.pdf U.S. Customs and Border Protection: Policy Regarding Border Search of Information] ]

ee also

*Border search exception
*Computer forensics
*"Carroll v. United States", ussc|267|132|1925
*"California v. Acevedo", ussc|500|565|1991
*"United States v. Boucher" (2007)

References

External links

* [http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/client/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=208403992&subSection=Management InformationWeek: Business, Cyber Liberties Groups Fight Laptop Searches]