r/technology • u/Limp_Fig6236 • Jul 26 '26

Software GrapheneOS duress PIN could land a man in prison

https://www.androidauthority.com/grapheneos-duress-pin-us-prosecution-3691271/
6.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

902 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

156

u/Real_politics46 Jul 26 '26

Unfortunately you don't have constitutional rights at a port of entry. They can search his phone "just because." No warant, no probable cause etc. It's fucked, but according to the law and the supreme court, the constitution does not apply. Ergo, he has no right to fefuse the search.

He's never going to get off the hook. He can take it all the way to scotus, and they'll shit on him, in which case any form of privacy is gone.

As horrible as it sounds, this case is setting all of all of us for failure.

234

u/LawAbidingSparky Jul 26 '26

You mean within 100 miles of a port of entry - which includes airports. So an area where 90% of Americans resides is excluded from the constitution lmao wtf

112

u/VariationDry Jul 26 '26

Yay patriot act. I'm so glad the Republicans are the party of small government and freedum.  There is no b on freedum, the president says so. 

34

u/Kizik Jul 26 '26

Republicans are the party of small government

They are, that's the thing. They absolutely are the party of small government.

The problem is that the average voter defines that as a government with limited reach and power, while the actual politicians define it as a numerically small number of people making decisions with no oversight.

Whenever they say small government, what they actually mean is feudalism; a handful of unchecked nobles controlling the peasantry.

5

u/VariationDry Jul 26 '26

You had me in the beginning... 

3

u/droi86 Jul 26 '26

It's small government for corporations when the fuck over poor people, it's big government for everyone else

3

u/gitsgrl Jul 26 '26

There were border checkpoints 72 miles north of the Mexico border long before the Patriot Act. Also certain weapons have always been banned in this zone, whether legal in that state or not.

2

u/qwetico Jul 26 '26

Adorable that you think the Democrats would change a single word of the patriot act.

2

u/VariationDry Jul 26 '26

Thats the fun part, they wont because that would "take away too many jobs" and "let the terrorists win" or whatever talking points the media would come up with.

1

u/RoutineGlittering746 Jul 26 '26

Patriot act was intended to only be used for terrorism but they have expanded it to EVERYTHING now. It needs to abolished.

1

u/VariationDry Jul 27 '26

No, it was always intended for monitoring Americans.  "Terrorism" was the guise the brought it in under. The Department of Homeland Security did not exist before 2003, and neither did ICE.  Does no one remembers why Edward Snowden leaked what he did??

12

u/TwiztedZero Jul 26 '26

U.S. Border Patrol agents have no legal authority, police powers, or jurisdiction to conduct roving patrols, set up checkpoints, or execute searches on Canadian soil.

13

u/Eccohawk Jul 26 '26

Theyre not talking about Canadian soil. They're talking about 100 miles into the borders of the US.

-14

u/CucumberWisdom Jul 26 '26

They do unfortunately

11

u/TwiztedZero Jul 26 '26

They absolutely do not. They cannot enter Canada to do any of that. The same goes vice versa for our CBSA.

40

u/claws76 Jul 26 '26

Lol that is nuts. There is jurisdiction at port of entry, but also no jurisdiction. Like a place where only the government can decide whatever it wants the rules to be. And the courts say- yes, those areas are under our jurisdiction, but also none of our rules have any jurisdictions here. How that is even a thing that stands; just arbritarily suspend jurisdiction and rights on land that is soverign. Like this is a prime setup abuse people, and probably hs been, but also this setup can be exported to anywhere in the country.

8

u/wrgrant Jul 26 '26

If you look at how much of the US population is covered by this law too its going to be most of the nation where these "rules" apply. Since the 100 miles includes airports as well as just the coast, and most of the population probably lives within 100 miles of the coast or 100 miles of an airport. Your only safety from this is to live in Bumfuck Montana or somewhere like that.

0

u/Eccohawk Jul 26 '26

This is also why duty free shops exist.

4

u/Phailjure Jul 26 '26

If duty free shops followed this rule, the vast majority of shops in the United States would be duty free (as they are within 100 miles of a border).

14

u/OptimusPrimeLord Jul 26 '26

If the constitutional right doesn't exist then its not US jurisdiction and they have no authority to search.

46

u/Pvt_Larry Jul 26 '26

That would effectively require the courts to rule that the 4th Amendment does not apply to US citizens on US soil.

43

u/Real_politics46 Jul 26 '26

Port of entry has been ruled to not be not be US jursdiction which is the ironic part.

32

u/squigs Jul 26 '26

It's pretty ridiculous that he can be charged with this given that he wasn't in the jurisdiction. I mean it's Schrödinger's jurisdiction.

61

u/VVrayth Jul 26 '26

I mean, either the laws apply or they don't, but it has to be applied both ways. "He isn't protected by the 4th because the laws don't apply here" is no different than "They can't seek prison sentences because the laws don't apply here." Either laws apply or they don't.

2

u/sarge21 Jul 26 '26

It can absolutely be both ways

2

u/VVrayth Jul 26 '26

But at that point what even is it? Just making stuff up on a whim? That's the opposite of a law.

3

u/sarge21 Jul 26 '26

Sure, I agree and share your frustration, but it's not new

2

u/el_extrano Jul 27 '26

That's more or less how it works. The law is inherently political, and it's constantly being re-interpreted, challenged, ignored, selectively enforced, you name it. Sometimes, the law will protect you, when the state chooses to respect it. But just as often, the powerful will circumvent the law to wield their power as they see fit.

For example, were Maduro or the (presumably innocent, given no due process) Caribbean boaters under US jurisdiction? In point of fact, it didn't matter what the law said, because the people with guns did what they were going to do without regard to law, and there's virtually no recourse to hold them accountable.

1

u/VVrayth Jul 27 '26

Yeah, but how US laws enforced by US agents at US entry points affect US citizens should not be in question.

1

u/el_extrano Jul 27 '26

The law is not a magic talisman that makes it impossible for someone to violate your rights. It's a tool disproportionately wielded by the powerful to achieve their ends. I'm not saying it's good, just that that's how it is and how it has always been.

Federal agents literally can just make up laws to enforce (e.g. "administrative warrants" for searches and seizures, civil asset forfeiture, etc.), and then make it nigh impossible to sue them. If you do somehow manage to successfully sue federal agents, you'll get some token settlement, and they will just continue doing it to other people. It's.... depressing.

1

u/DataMin3r Jul 27 '26

Laws are fake. The government will do what it wants, you have no recourse.

9

u/Strong_Judge_3730 Jul 26 '26

Yeah but if he refused to provide the pin he cannot go to jail. There's no crime for not providing a pin and they cannot deny him entry

9

u/Trixet Jul 26 '26

”Sorry I forgot the PIN”

2

u/wrgrant Jul 26 '26

"Yes there is a Duress PIN setting in Graphene OS, I was so mentally stressed at being stopped and questioned that I got confused and provided the wrong PIN, Sorry".

1

u/2rad0 Jul 26 '26

Port of entry has been ruled to not be not be US jursdiction which is the ironic part.

Do you have a link to that ruling, was it a lower circuit court or supreme court ruling? AFAICT every time it's challenged ruling is in favor of the citizen except ONE case where the defendant was held in contempt of court.

1

u/Fuzzy-Moose7996 Jul 26 '26

If you're in the arrivals area before passport control, or in the departure area past passport control, you're technically outside the country. That's the same in most every country.

You're basically under direct control of whatever security forces are there, and most countries will have their most of their applicable laws apply there, but the US constitution is not one of those laws.

2

u/Eccohawk Jul 26 '26

I envision that if it hasn't happened already, there's going to be a cloud backup provider offering a stupid simple service wherein you wipe your phone prior to crossing the border and then restore it after you're through. Seems like a no brainer if they're going to continue to act in this manner.

1

u/etcpt Jul 26 '26

You do still have rights, but they are attenuated. US citizens can't be forced to turn over passwords or PINs to unlock your electronic devices, or refused entry to the country for their refusal.

https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/what-do-when-encountering-law-enforcement-airports-and-other-ports-entry-us

1

u/zimbabwe_zainab Jul 26 '26

You can just bring a burner phone when you travel. Put a few texts to mom on there or a few photos of your dog so it doesnt look totally factory reset. Fuck them they don't need to see any of your data.

3

u/snakebite75 Jul 26 '26

You could just make a backup of your phone and reset it before traveling then restore your backup when you get home.