News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Law Enforcement Uses Border Search Exception as Fourth Amendment Loophole. Parent comment

Re:Law Enforcement Uses Border Search Exception as Fourth Am... by user982 on Saturday December 10, 2016 @03:51AM (#13144770)
The border search exception considers the "border" to stretch 100 miles inland, corralling two-thirds of the American population within this zone of "virtually no rights."[1]

[1]: https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Law Enforcement Uses Border Search Exception as Fourth Am... by rayiner on Saturday December 10, 2016 @09:25AM (#13145749)
That's been well debunked. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jan/... http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2013/02/does-a-constituti...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Law Enforcement Uses Border Search Exception as Fourth Am... by Spooky23 on Saturday December 10, 2016 @03:04PM (#13147596)
It's somewhere in the middle of ACLUs hysterics and "no problem". You're taking a strong control against abuse (warrant) and replacing it with police discretion.

Given the broad liberties that the modern government takes with things, I think skepticism is in order.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Law Enforcement Uses Border Search Exception as Fourth Am... by tptacek on Saturday December 10, 2016 @03:28PM (#13147730)
We don't have to wonder about this. It's come up more than once before SCOTUS, and SCOTUS decisively rejected the idea. To apply border crossing doctrines to a search, the case has to have some nexus with an actual border crossing.

People live a couple miles from the Canadian border do not, in fact, lose their 4th Amendment rights.

[ Parent | on HN ]