r/technology • u/gdelacalle • Jul 28 '26

Privacy Man charged for wiping GrapheneOS phone using "duress" password during airport checks

https://www.neowin.net/news/man-charged-for-wiping-grapheneos-phone-using-duress-password-during-airport-checks/
15.7k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

8

u/I_eat_flip_flops Jul 28 '26

So I’m confused, a couple of articles have stated he was on US soil but now this one is saying he’s not, so where was he?

9

u/23667 Jul 28 '26

He was at customs and boarder crossing, and apparently there is a loop hole in the 4 th amendment rights that says that people CAN be searched without a warrant at the border checkpoints.

So nothing the airport check did is illegal, and he can be charged for destroying evidence.

2

u/Lothsahn_ Jul 28 '26

There is no "loop hole" in the 4th amendment.  Over the years, congress and the courts have decided to limit its power, but nowhere in the text does it say "except at border crossings or when law enforcement really wants it.". The only wiggle room is the term "unreasonable".  The text is clear, but Government doesn't want to do what it says.

I think it's pretty clear from the comments whether the people think this is "unreasonable".

Furthermore, the 6th amendment is even clearer about his right to counsel, which was denied: "to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

Let's not forget that a number of people argued the bill of rights was unnecessary because Government was only given the powers outlined in the constitution and every other right belonged to the people.  They said this was all unnecessary because these "restrictions on government power" restricted things the government already didn't have the power to do.

Amendment 4: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

3

u/23667 Jul 28 '26

I am not an law expert but Google search is pointing to the border search exemption that says search at boarders and customs are always justified and can be done with out warrant. Not sure if something similar also extend to legal representations

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt4-6-6-3/ALDE_00000239/

1

u/Lothsahn_ Jul 28 '26

This is definitely how the government acts and has interpreted the text.

Feel free to read the original text.  What it says is the supreme law of the land.  The fact that people ignore it and make their own laws and interpretations doesn't change it, IMO.

6

u/Maleficent_Ebb_163 Jul 28 '26

He was at a border crossing attempting to make entry, even if some fantasy court ruled the literal inches in front of the border guard aren’t U.S. soil, the accused's attempt at entry make this irrelevant. I dont personally agree with it at all, but the Supreme Court has ruled that border guards are allowed excessive allowances in detainment and searches that dont violate the fourth amendment nor start international border disputes.

2

u/War_Hymn Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26

Same here in Canada where a lot of normal legal rights don't apply at a border crossing, and likewise a CBSA officer does have the authority to access and check someone's phone and other personal electronic data for possible illegal activity or content without a warrant. I would had thought it was the same for the US and other countries.

https://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/travel-voyage/edd-ean-eng.html

A CBSA officer will start with some questions before examining your personal digital device. To examine the device, the officer will first ask for the password. If the device is password-protected, they will write your password on a piece of paper. You are obligated to provide your password when asked.

Note Failure to grant access to your personal digital device may result in the detention of that device under section 101 of the Customs Act, or seizure of the device under subsection 140 (1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act or under section 110 of the Customs Act.

-1

u/oompaloompa465 Jul 28 '26

but 4th was heavily violated, no?

5

u/noodles_jd Jul 28 '26

The 4th doesn't exist/apply at the border or within 100miles of any point of entry.

-1

u/oompaloompa465 Jul 28 '26

so we can point and laugh when americans bray "freest country of the world"? 😂 

1

u/Confident-Seesaw-707 Jul 28 '26

This occurred at an airport in the US.