I guess it's 100 miles from any "external boundary" as well as "points of entry", but not "100 miles from points of entry".

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

But then there's also this:

> In practice, Border Patrol agents routinely ignore or misunderstand the limits of their legal authority in the course of individual stops, resulting in violations of the constitutional rights of innocent people. These problems are compounded by inadequate training for Border Patrol agents, a lack of oversight by CBP and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the consistent failure of CBP to hold agents accountable for abuse. No matter what CBP officers and Border Patrol agents think, our Constitution applies throughout the United States, including within this “100-mile border zone.”

Ignorance of the law is no defense... unless you are a Federal agent violating people's Constitutional rights. America in a nutshell.

This isn't true. But, 100 miles from our two borders is incredibly abusive enough.

You’re forgetting the coastlines, near which a large percentage of Americans live.

You're right. I meant to say that international airports don't yield a 100 mile radius for the CBP to perform arbitrary stops. Shorelines count; the whole situation is ridiculous.

So would you suggest that US Customs not operate at ports of entry?

I guess we could go back to 1910 and only import stuff and admit people in coastal cities. Make everyone from Europe fly to JFK on the way to Atlanta.

Operating at ports of entry is fine.

Pretending I don't have Fourth Amendment rights on one side of the Customs desk at said ports of entry is not.

The customs bubble extends beyond the desk. For example, bonded warehouses.

I said the Fourth Amendment issue is "on one side of the Customs desk at said ports of entry", not "in every coastal area". The idea that you are subject to warrantless seizure on American soil just because you haven't cleared customs yet is a travesty, and I'm glad this ruling has started to address that.

As for coastal areas, though, If CBP can stop me away from the border without a warrant and without reasonable suspicion of a crime, that IMO is a Fourth Amendment violation. The ACLU cites specific cases of this happening: https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/14_9...

> Between 2006 and 2010 in the Rochester, NY, area, approximately 300 immigrants with legal status were arrested by Border Patrol agents, then released

They also cite the regulations establishing the 100 mile rule: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/287.1 defines "reasonable distance" and "external boundary", and https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1357 utilizes those definitions to do things like "without warrant... interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States" and "to board and search for aliens... any railway car, aircraft, conveyance, or vehicle".

It's quite clear that significant parts (all?) of Delaware fall within that claimed jurisdiction.