The government (via their customs agents) can search anything they want at the border and need neither probable cause or a warrant. Not going to work.

Which is defined as 100 miles from any border:

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

They definitely need a warrant and definitely need probably cause. And it definitely has to be within the jurisdiction of CBP, ie. they can't pull you over for running a light.

What you do have is a lot of Americans will defer to LEOs without a second thought.

At the border, they need neither a warrant nor probable cause.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

This is correct. I mistakenly entered the wrong reply. I was referring to the 100 mile border zone. IT's not the same as the border crossing so I'm not sure why people continue to refer to it as being a rights free zone when it comes to CBP.

No, they really don't need a warrant and they really don't need probable cause. I could pull out USC refs but just read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

No, they still need probable cause of an immigration or customs violation away from the border but within the 100 mile zone.

The government's position is that they do not. The courts have disagreed, especially with respect to using evidence found under such circumstances in criminal cases.

My mistake, I was actually replying to lotsofpulp on the 100 mile border zone. Once you've cleared the border it's not a free for all. All rights, except those related to the border crossing, are restored.

They can simply deny entry if you're a non-citizen and don't cooperate. For any reason whatsoever. (This, of course, holds for any sovereign country that does not have an open borders agreement with a country that you are a citizen of.)

If my choice is between not being able to enter the US and having US authorities go through my personal devices, I will choose non-entry. That part doesn't worry me so much.

What does worry me is that at the border I have no rights. The usual protections enjoyed by people inside the US don't apply to me. My privacy and dignity at the behest of the whims of whichever border guard I might encounter, and I have zero legal recourse if my rights are violated.

This is not exclusive to the US. Every country's border works similar. They can do enhanced interrogation without probably cause, without a lawyer.

You're right to refuse is still intact but your request to gain entry will almost certainly be denied.

Be careful, "enhanced interrogation" denotes actual torture, such as waterboarding.

You are right. I've changed my reply to enhanced questioning.

It's a shame that GWB, Condi Rice, Cheney, Tenet, Ashcroft, and Rumsfeld are walking around, on TV, and sitting on boards and none have faced consequences.