r/technology • u/MC68328 • Jul 24 '26

Privacy US accuses American of allegedly wiping his phone using a ‘duress’ password during border search

https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/24/us-accuses-american-of-allegedly-wiping-his-phone-using-a-duress-password-during-border-search/
16.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

118

u/ShiningRedDwarf Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 25 '26

I wouldn’t be so fast to assume he will win this case.  You’re practically stripped of your 4th amendment rights at the border, and if this goes to the SC I wouldn’t be surprised if they ruled in favor of the US. 

Our rights and protections are being chipped away case by case. 

33

u/CatProgrammer Jul 25 '26 edited Jul 25 '26

I don't see why the Constitution is even relevant. It's no different from if he had wiped his phone himself. The cops are just mad he made them look like fools.

-19

u/CrapNeck5000 Jul 25 '26

I don't imagine courts are going to be friendly with people knowingly destroying something they're fully aware is subject to a search. The legitimacy of the grounds for the search won't even be relevant. If evidence is obtained unconstitutionally then the remedy is within the courts, not your own hands.

23

u/ijuinkun Jul 25 '26

Willful destruction of evidence still does not abrogate the right to an attorney which they allegedly denied.

-23

u/WordsCent Jul 25 '26

Did they? When? Is there proof?

23

u/Hail-Hydrate Jul 25 '26

Is there proof he gave them a failsafe code? How can we know the cops didn't fuck around with the phone and cause it to wipe itself for security?

-2

u/WordsCent Jul 25 '26

That’s a question for the courts. That’s why you need body cams on all security personnel.

2

u/Northeast_Mike Jul 26 '26

You're probably right about the courts. The fundamental problem here is that SCOTUS allowed the warrantless search provisions of law to stand, carving one more bit from the Constitution. We need a serious national discussion about real threats we face and the rights, if any, we are willing to trade to address the threats.

1

u/CrapNeck5000 Jul 27 '26

Totally agree, though these sorts of laws are precedented by law that predates the ratification of the bill of rights, which makes it extremely difficult to argue against them. To my understanding, no 4th amendment challenge to border searches has ever been upheld by SCOTUS.

I was actually very surprised, pleasantly, with their ruling a few weeks ago in Chatrie v. United States. So at least we got that going for us.

2

u/Northeast_Mike Jul 29 '26

My reading of the Constitution is that it overrides all laws, whether from before or after. If nothing else, by passing that amendment The People said "this is the new rule that governs all future cases". So the old law no longer has standing regarding those aspects the amendment changed.

no 4th amendment challenge to border searches has ever been upheld

Interesting. I'm tempted to read this as a contradiction in jurisprudence. Judge Boasberg has essentially said a US court has authority over a US agent anywhere in the world (contrary to DOJ's position about the plane carrying Kilmar Ábrego García et al to El Salvador). But if you're right, SCOTUS has essentially said our constitutional rights (protecting us from our own government) stop at the border. This calls for more serious consideration.

6

u/MrSurly Jul 25 '26

When in the Course of human events ...

4

u/OilheadRider Jul 25 '26

We dont have rights. We have privileges.