San Francisco – A Federal Appeals Court has ruled that US Customs officers do not need reasonable suspicion to search the contents of laptop hard drives and other media.  In a 3-0 decision, the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that laptops are just like any other physical property and can be searched at the nation’s borders.  The judges also said airports with immigration checkpoints also serve as border stations.

The case involved 43-year-old Orange County California resident Michael Arnold who was returning from a three week vacation in the Philippines in 2005.  Arnold landed at the Los Angeles International Airport and was randomly selected for secondary screening by US Border and Customs officers.

The officers instructed Arnold to turn on his laptop and then went through his desktop folders.  They saw two folders called “Kodak Memories” and “Kodak Pictures” and found two nude pictures of women in those folders.  Supervisors were called and agents found child pornography in other folders.  Arnold was charged with transporting child pornography and traveling overseas to have sex with a child.

Arnold and his attorney appealed to suppress the evidence.  He argued that reasonable suspicion was needed to start the search because laptops were protected environments much like a home or the human mind.  A lower court agreed and suppressed the evidence, but the Ninth Circuit has now reversed the decision.

The decision written by Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain states that border agents don’t need any suspicion at all to search laptops because they are considered to be physical property like any other luggage going through the border.  The decision can be interpreted to cover the contents of mobile phones and any other digital media.

As much as I want to see these sickos goto jail for...

Apr 22, 2008 09:39     

As much as I want to see these sickos goto jail for doing things like that to children I don't think the government has any right to search you for anything without reasonable cause. This goes to show you that a strong password policy and some encryption can go a long way.
Alex report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +2

Agree

Apr 22, 2008 10:47     

Sicko should go to jail, but that doesn't mean any laptop at anytime crossing a border or airport security should have the right to be searched. If they tried that crap on me I would refuse to the end and best of luck to them trying to get into my laptop.
crawlgsx report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +2

You know...

Apr 22, 2008 11:02     

As much as governments do, and do not have the right to do this, I think that if you really wanted to outsmart them, it might just look bad. Depending on how things look, like if you had encryption, it might look like you were hiding something, BAD. So as fair as this isn't, lets just say that at least this guy got caught, and lets hope that we don't seeing the pedo replaced with a terrorist with bomb plans on there, cause as we all know, that would be bad. So pro, con, least some one was actually caught.

Dean of Stupid report abuse vote down vote up Votes: -1

Not That Hard to Prevent Snooping

Apr 22, 2008 12:50     

It's not that hard to prevent anyone from snooping into your system. You just have to know some technical aspects of Windows.
Cypherdude report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +1

They have your user rights

Apr 22, 2008 13:04     

They make you log in so that they have the same rights as you. That doesn't necessarily give them access to, say, a hidden truecrypt volume but, if you want to go on with your trip, it means they can do or undo anything else windows-based that you can. The Canadian border patrol did this to me on a trip there from the US in 2003. I was carrying a work laptop, used by many people, so I was a bit worried that I might get blamed for someone else's foibles but nothing bad came of it.

heulenwolf report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

This could be a problem if the notebook had classif...

Apr 22, 2008 13:47     

This could be a problem if the notebook had classified information or company confidential materials. Even if you did encrypt or hide something on the computer what if some one was computer savvy enough to find it and ask you to decrypt it - if you refused wouldn't that be breaking the law? As much as sicko needs to be locked away, I don't think the approach is to make HD contents searchable.
Pdogg report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +1

I just don't see the point

Apr 22, 2008 15:14     

In the amount of time that customs agents can reasonably take to examine the contents of a laptop, are they really likely to find incriminating evidence (assuming that it is there at all) on the laptop of a criminal/terrorist? If the hypothetical terrorist takes the 30 seconds required to rename his Word file from "My plans to take down the United States.doc" to "TPS report 2.16.2007.doc" is any customs agent going to give it a second glance? All this does is force criminals and terrorists to be just a little smarter. Sure, we might catch one here or there (like this sicko perv, who deserves worse than our legal system can hand out), but most will continue to slip through the cracks. In the meantime, honest people will have their civil rights violated.

Andrew report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

This is just wrong...

Apr 22, 2008 18:08     

I'm as happy as anyone else that this scum is off the streets, but you can't do it by trampling over someone's rights. The last thing I want is for some jerk at airport security to be looking at photos of my wife and I on vacation. Where does it end? Can they read my emails as well? Maybe they'd like to copy my tax returns and bank statements that are saved on my comp. No, I don't keep bank statements on my comp typically but some people do. Seriously, this opens the door to a lot of abuse.

Task report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

A flash drive is worth a thousand notebooks ....

Apr 23, 2008 02:05     

... just get one, that doesn't have a metal connector - one of those slim ones. Put all incriminating files on it and have it in your pocket. It won't trigger any alarm or suspicion. And it took me only ~2 minutes to come with this idea. A terrorist having days or months to think his plan through might come with other, more advanced countermeasures. Another security measure, that does not work. :|

Vorkronor report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

WTF??

Apr 23, 2008 03:01     

My god, how fu**ing stupid can this judge be??? Have they even USED a computer before? I can only hope this will be overturned IMMEDIATELY. Seriously, has this A33HOLE ever read the BILL OF RIGHTS? Talk about Unwarranted search and seizure!
loosely_coupled report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

ridiculous...

Apr 25, 2008 03:44     

This is so ridiculously easy to circumvent that it is a joke. Anyone who really wants to hide something and does just a minimum of research, has everything at his disposal to get around this. Worthless, false impression of safety and will only make queues longer.
knowitall report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +1