EFF and ACLU filed an amicus brief urging the Fourth Circuit to require probable-cause warrants for all border device searches, manual and forensic.
Key Takeaways
CBP conducted 55,318 device searches in FY2025; EFF argues both manual and forensic searches demand the same warrant standard.
EFF’s brief applies Riley v. California (2014) to the border context, arguing cell phone privacy interests exceed those in luggage.
Prior Fourth Circuit cases (Kolsuz 2018, Aigbekaen 2019) addressed forensic searches only; U.S. v. Belmonte Cardozo now puts manual searches before the court.
EFF contends warrants would not bottleneck border processing: officers can retain devices, release travelers, then obtain a warrant or invoke exigent circumstances.
The Knight Institute and Reporters Committee filed a companion brief covering First Amendment implications of border device searches.
Hacker News Comment Review
Commenters flagged that the practical scope extends well beyond airports: the federal government defines “the border” as 100 miles inland from any international boundary, including the Great Lakes, covering roughly 80% of the U.S. population.
Notable Comments
@superkuh: “the US federal government considers 100 miles inland from any international border… as being ‘the border’” – covers where most Americans actually live.
