DHS Quietly Announces They Can Seize Your Laptop / Cellphone Within 100 Miles Of Border!

The Police State isn't coming....It's already here.

The DHS, which secures the nation’s border, in 2009 announced that it would conduct a “Civil Liberties Impact Assessment” of its suspicionless search-and-seizure policy pertaining to electronic devices “within 120 days.” More than three years later, the DHS office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties published a two-page executive summary of its findings.
“We also conclude that imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits,” the executive summary said.

That's right, they don't even need reasonable suspicion.

According to legal precedent, the Fourth Amendment — the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures — does not apply along the border. By the way, the government contends the Fourth-Amendment-Free Zone stretches 100 miles inland from the nation’s actual border.

www.wired.com...

The ACLU is currently blowing the whistle on this, attempting to fight it (not a big ACLU fan, but at least they appear to be on the American's side in this case) -

Aiming to determine the impact of border searches on Americans’ civil liberties, the Department of Homeland Security has produced a report on its policy of combing through and sometimes confiscating travelers’ laptops, cell phones, and other electronic devices—even when there is no suspicion of wrongdoing. The report was completed sometime between October 2011 and September 2012, and last week DHS quietly posted only the executive summary on its website, without many people noticing.

If it’s true that our rights are safe and that DHS is doing all the things it needs to do to safeguard them, then why won’t it show us the results of its assessment? And why would it be legitimate to keep a report about the impact of a policy on the public’s rights hidden from the very public being affected?

www.aclu.org...

The shocking part, besides illegal search and seizure, is the real estate this assessment includes. 100 miles from the border, including oceans, affects A LOT of people:

Constitution Free Zone Map

From DHS' site:

DHS integrates civil rights and civil liberties into all agency activities by: Promoting respect for civil rights and civil liberties in policy creation and implementation;

www.dhs.gov...

Really?

When is enough, enough?

This affects 2 out of 3 Americans! 197 million people!

www.dhs.gov...

I live close to that zone, and my inlaws live well within it - 15 miles from the Mexican border. So DHS can put up a roadblock at the end of their street and seize their laptop? Yeah, I think there's a big problem with that.

Cant they (US) kill American minors anywhere on this planet, or in the solar system based on Executive practice?

So, its a given if they can take even American childrens' lives in the blink of an eye, they can any of their personal belongings and such.. probably next of kins' inheritances too... tptb OWN you!

reply to post by AwakeinNM


They're already putting up roadblocks!

Relax everyone, it's for our safety, after all.......

Glenn Greenwald writes that “the most extremist power any political leader can assert is the power to target his own citizens for execution without any charges or due process, far from any battlefield. The Obama administration has not only asserted exactly that power in theory, but has exercised it in practice.”
This is the power of a dictator.
Get scared people, react, or be eliminated.
Right now, in the home of the free and the brave, acting like you ARE free and brave, can and will get you arrested. No 'probable cause', needed anymore.
It's "The War On..." whatever THEY say it is; PERIOD.

I doubt many know where the ACLU derived their "Constitution Free Zone" map from. They determined that from this ruling in 1975 by the Supreme Court of the United States.

United States v. Brignoni-Ponce - 422 U.S. 873 (1975)

In that opinion though, the Supreme Court clearly protects the 4th Amendment from an over-reaching Federal agency that took the following regulation to mean they have free-reign to stop vehicles:

8 CFR § 287.1(a)

Of course we should be diligent as to how these agencies apply that CFR and Brignoni-Ponce to their whim, but it is by far not a blank check situation and if this is happening, how come there are no court cases being brought up? My guess is regular folks aren't getting these searches as you think they are. Like I said though, it doesn't mean not to remain vigilant and aware.

Originally posted by Signals
reply to post by AwakeinNM

 

They're already putting up roadblocks!

Relax everyone, it's for our safety, after all.......

Where? I still only see the normal stations that have been there for decades...

Canada has been doing this for years, but of course they live under the crown as royal subjects. One time I went to Canada, and got pulled over on one of those "go pull over there, you are being randomly searched" stops, and they searched everything, even confiscated my phone and were reading text messages, snickering at dirty text messages I had been texting my girlfriend. They browsed through my laptop and were looking at all of my personal photos and e-mails. I felt really violated. But then I realized, it was Canada. They have no constitution, rights or freedoms. They live under the British monarchy. I thought at the time "glad I live in the USA! this would never happen back home..."

Guess I was wrong.

Thanks Obama and TPTB!

Originally posted by ownbestenemy

Originally posted by Signals
reply to post by AwakeinNM

 

They're already putting up roadblocks!

Relax everyone, it's for our safety, after all.......

Where? I still only see the normal stations that have been there for decades...

Have you been living under a rock?





As for your previous post, that is absolutely incorrect.

In 1975, there was no Department of Homeland Security, and there was no 100 mile federal checkpoint zone from borders.

This all started after 9/11, when DHS was formed (2002), and Bush signed us up for the Patriot Act.

Bush II (Obama) has furthered this treasonous agenda.


en.wikipedia.org...

Their "quiet announcement" will remain that way until we all gather our voices as one in unison, and reject the notion that "it's only happening to people that deserve it". As a society, our freedoms (past tense) have been slowly crumbled and spread into a trail that will be very hard to trace and regain. A new stance is needed. We need to awaken our neighbors to the truth; that our liberty has been circumvented and twisted to resemble what it no longer is. Do we accept being 'allowed' to exist earning less than a livable wage? Do we accept being slaves to debt, unable to raise our voices for fear of rocking the boat, thus capsizing our families chances of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"? Do we accept looking over our collective 'electronic' shoulders, knowing that our own government intercepts every byte? I am unwilling to survive under the thumb of oppression; are there more than I? Are there more voices of discontent? Will we be heard; or will DHS label us terrorists? Speak up Amerika, before our voices are muted and silenced as a threat.

Makes you wonder if it will make people aware if their tweeting and Facebook tools are confiscated that something is wrong. Probably giving too much credit here because there's always TV shows to go back to. Safety measures provided against suspects including yourself with confiscation will ensure you can have your fast food and TV! Yay!

Originally posted by Signals
As for your previous post, that is absolutely incorrect.

In 1975, there was no Department of Homeland Security, and there was no 100 mile federal checkpoint zone from borders.

ETA: Looks like you sir....have the facts wrong as you stated above.....care to own up to that?! Probably not since this is ATS...

No it was under the original Border Patrol agency.....I know when the DHS was created and with that creation, it moved the responsibility of the USBP under the DHS. That CFR was authorized into law way before the Patriot Act was ever conceived so yes, the "100 miles" was established way before that; as evidence being referenced in the 1975 SCOTUS case I linked. Did they go in and slip that in to make you think this all came about because of the Patriot Act?

Here is straight from 1975 -- Referencing your supposed "NEW" regulation...

Under current regulations, this authority may be exercised anywhere within 100 miles of the border. 8 CFR § 287.1(a) (1975). The Border Patrol interprets the statute as granting authority to stop moving vehicles and question the occupants about their citizenship, even when its officers have no reason to believe that the occupants are aliens or that other aliens may be concealed in the vehicle. [Footnote 3] But "no Act of Congress can authorize a violation of the Constitution," Almeida-Sanchez, supra at 413 U. S. 272,

Use some critical thinking skills and read through the Case Law I presented; that is where the ACLU derived their "Constitution Free Zone" even though it is hardly that.

reply to post by ownbestenemy


From your first post -

Of course we should be diligent as to how these agencies apply that CFR and Brignoni-Ponce to their whim, but it is by far not a blank check situation and if this is happening, how come there are no court cases being brought up? My guess is regular folks aren't getting these searches as you think they are.

Your "guess" is wrong. Regular folks are most certainly subject to these checkpoints now.

You can argue about 1975 all day long....However, these illegal checkpoints started after DHS was created, not in the Seventies.

You are attempting to minimize the information I have presented in a matter of fact "move along, nothing to see here" style, but it will not work.

You too will be asked for your "papers" someday, maybe then it will hit home what has happened to this country.

reply to post by Signals


No I am asking evidence, specifically where the courts have suspended 4th Amendment Rights, at a checkpoint? Now the agencies may be operating outside of it and it is up to the citizen who's Right was violated to redress it, but as far as the law, random checkpoints established don't fall under the test and "roving patrols" are a clear violation of the 4th Amendment in these terms as presented.

I am not saying move along, I am saying where are the people who supposedly have had their Rights suspended in this fashion? If they did, they should be redressing it in the court of law not whining about it on some obscure website.

So yes, keep diligent and I am not discounting your notion here but rather brought the actual facts into play such as: where is this "100 mile Constitution Free Zone" (which by the way, is a contrived and tenuous notion), where this mile marker is established via law and to what application it can be applied in.

At the border and established points created via law, there is an area where "reasonable" does fall by the wayside that I do not agree with, but for "random checkpoints" and "roving patrols", they still have to abide by the 4th Amendment and provide reasonable suspicion to do so.

This is some type of war maneuver, an attack on your freedoms. Starting at the edges the zone will expand inwards until eventually the entire North America is effected. These legal criminals who just want to steal everything must be told NO. Vote with your pen. Vote with your voice and let those in the White House and in Congress bow to the will of the people. You are all their boss. I think they really need to be all reminded of that fact. Savvy.

Papers!
Papers please!
NAZI Germany, circa 1932

Let's hope they don't try to include international airports as a "border"...

That would then encompass pretty much everywhere.

reply to post by Signals


Yup, I'm inside the shaded area. Here's a question, it's off topic though. The Sheriff's here in NY have said that they would refuse any orders that infringed on our 2nd amendment rights. Now with DHS's "Constitution Free Zone" couldn't they also use that against the 2nd amendment too?

This would mean that they could take anything electronics from anyone in the state of Florida.... This is very very scary.

reply to post by Chance321


Yeah sure, all they have to do is deem you a "terrorist", then you have no rights....

Hell they can drone you to death if they want.

It is encouraging to see Sheriff's across the country standing up to this tyranny though