Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> I routinely do this before i go through the TSA complimentary-preflight-massage line, when i'm within about 50 miles of the mexico border, and whenever i'm pulled over at a traffic stop.

These are all unnecessary, to various degrees. Compelling your fingerprint requires a warrant, which officers had in the linked case. The controversy is whether a search warrant of a property extends to compelling a fingerprint, not whether officers can go searching phones with abandon.

Specifically: - TSA officers aren't police officers. They can search you because you're entering an airport, but you're free to leave at any time (though they can detain you until police arrive, as any citizen can). - Within 100 miles of the border (not only the Mexican) officers can detain people momentarily or search vehicles to ascertain their citizenship. That's the only additional power they have, they can't search your phone (or even search your glove compartment) without probable cause. - When you're pulled over for a traffic stop, a search requires probable cause.

You didn't mention the one time you might think about doing this: going through customs, where your 4A rights are weaker and less certain. If you're interested in learning more, US vs Cotterman is a good jumping-off point.



> When you're pulled over for a traffic stop, a search requires probable cause.

That's the theory. In practice police can get away with pretty much anything, and if you make it to the point where a judge is listening to you, he/she won't be sympathetic.

You've seen the videos where the idiot cop didn't realize his camera was on and filmed himself placing drugs? This didn't just happen once.


> if you make it to the point where a judge is listening to you, he/she won't be sympathetic

Do you have any evidence for this? Courts routinely suppress evidence.

> and filmed himself placing drugs?

I saw the video; it's bad and it's an injustice. No one was convicted of a crime in this case, though I suspect others likely plead guilty in similar circumstances given their incentives in our current system.

But why does that affects your decision to lock your phone? Are you worried police are going to illegally compel a fingerprint from you and then put something on your phone?


> Do you have any evidence for this?

Of course I can't comment on all judges, but in my few interactions with them, the court sides with the police. Call it an anecdote if you want, but "citation needed" comments wear thin.

> But why does that affects your decision to lock your phone? Are you worried police are going to illegally compel a fingerprint from you and then put something on your phone?

I worry about every interaction with a police officer. They are the single biggest threat I ever run into.


> These are all unnecessary, to various degrees.

Even limiting your search to HN there is a plethora of examples of situations that OP describes where phones and devices have been invaded


Police routinely violate 4A rights.

But we have a court system that suppresses evidence that's gained from those violations, or any evidence that's found from information gained in those violations.

Do you have examples where courts have allowed that evidence to be used against people?


I power my devices off completely when CBP gets involved.


> They can search you because you're entering an airport, but you're free to leave at any time (though they can detain you until police arrive, as any citizen can).

If they can detain you then how are you free to leave?


> they can detain you until police arrive, as any citizen can

They have the same rights an any other citizen to detain you and call a police officer.

Citizen detention laws vary by state, but generally there's a fairly high standard of probability that you committed a crime.

https://www.tsa.gov/blog/2016/07/03/tsa-myth-busters-do-tsa-...


You are free to leave until they detain you.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: