5 ms·

Law Enforcement Uses Border Search Exception as Fourth Amendment Loophole

113 points by DiabloD3 10y ago

ChuckMcM 10y ago
Are we still not talking about politics?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- waterphone 10y ago
  The experiment was ended early. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13131251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13131251
  - ggreer 10y ago
    I was wondering why so many submissions seemed politics-related. I miss the experiment. It certainly wasn't perfect, but it was better.
    - finedoit 10y ago
      It was burying our heads in the sand at the very time when it's most critical to be aware of how we and our industry are affected and involved with politics. If someone in the tech industry who provided significant support to the incoming administration was also involved with YCombinator, the timing would almost be sketchy.
      - BuuQu9hu 10y ago
        Are you referring to Peter Thiel? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel
      - ggreer 10y ago
        Pretty much every political thread on HN accomplishes nothing more than to increase the net amount of frustration in the world. The same ideologues rehash the same arguments. No one's mind is changed. And each time a few people get fed-up and quit HN, causing the remaining community to be slightly more strident. The sooner these threads are dealt with, the healthier our community will be.
        wfo 10y ago
        Not the case, of course. I've changed my mind thanks to political discussion on HN. I've seen others do the same. I don't believe you that there are people quitting HN because of politics threads -- there's no evidence for that or reason to believe it. Politics can be really, really relevant to tech and vice versa. A lot of the things that have been discussed in this election are explicitly about technology and software (H1B visas, 'closing up the internet', social media to name a few). It would be ridiculous to plug our ears and pretend they don't exist -- that's how non-technical people end up making the rules about technology that we have to follow, i.e. how we got into a lot of the messes we are in today. Tech nerds like us love to pretend it doesn't matter because it's hard and it involves feelings and emotions and you can't reason your way out of it but we always, always lose big time with that approach.
      - TeMPOraL 10y ago
        > It was burying our heads in the sand at the very time when it's most critical to be aware of how we and our industry are affected and involved with politics. That's one big problem with politics - it's a weaponized art of crying wolf. Everything, no matter how trivial, is an emergency, and "it's most critical to be aware" of it. Most of those things sort themselves out anyway, and are in fact of little real consequence.
      - late2part 10y ago
        I agree! One thing I loved about living in India was that politics and international issues could be discussed in most any forum, at least in the social/business circle I had there. People didn't feel that differences were bad, and people talked to learn and understand each other.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
eagsalazar2 10y ago
I mean, yes this is awful and shameful but is it really news? It has always been the case that you have virtually no rights when entering or leaving the US especially with regard to protections against unreasonable search and seizure.
- throwaway4891a 10y ago
  It's awful and shouldn't be normalized: which is the point of the ACLU's argument. If this guy, whom is also a US citizen I might add, is suspected of breaking the law, law enforcement needs to meet the burden of proof of obtaining a warrant and not just walk all over the Constitution.
  - wfunction 10y ago
    If I understand correctly, these searches and seizures are occurring before the person is granted entry, which means they have not yet inside the country, nor even shown that they are allowed to be in the country in the first place. To me, it (unfortunately) makes sense that the laws of a country only apply once you've entered it, so I actually can't fault their logic there -- if I were a judge, I would (reluctantly) rule that this logic is fine. What is DO have a problem with, though, is that they seem to have deliberately structured the procedures this way in the first place precisely for this goal. People should be granted/denied entry first, then searched afterward if entry is granted -- because it would seem that their permission to be present inside the country should be independent of what they are allowed to bring into the country. So if the ACLU is fighting against this, I sure hope they're making this argument rather than the first one. Does this make sense, or do people disagree?
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - grecy 10y ago
      > To me, it (unfortunately) makes sense that the laws of a country only apply once you've entered it, Are you saying US citizens have zero constitutional rights the second they step out of the US?
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

113 points by DiabloD3 10y ago

ChuckMcM 10y ago

Are we still not talking about politics?

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
waterphone 10y ago
The experiment was ended early. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13131251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13131251
- ggreer 10y ago
  I was wondering why so many submissions seemed politics-related. I miss the experiment. It certainly wasn't perfect, but it was better.
  - finedoit 10y ago
    It was burying our heads in the sand at the very time when it's most critical to be aware of how we and our industry are affected and involved with politics. If someone in the tech industry who provided significant support to the incoming administration was also involved with YCombinator, the timing would almost be sketchy.
    - BuuQu9hu 10y ago
      Are you referring to Peter Thiel? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel
    - ggreer 10y ago
      Pretty much every political thread on HN accomplishes nothing more than to increase the net amount of frustration in the world. The same ideologues rehash the same arguments. No one's mind is changed. And each time a few people get fed-up and quit HN, causing the remaining community to be slightly more strident. The sooner these threads are dealt with, the healthier our community will be.
      - wfo 10y ago
        Not the case, of course. I've changed my mind thanks to political discussion on HN. I've seen others do the same. I don't believe you that there are people quitting HN because of politics threads -- there's no evidence for that or reason to believe it. Politics can be really, really relevant to tech and vice versa. A lot of the things that have been discussed in this election are explicitly about technology and software (H1B visas, 'closing up the internet', social media to name a few). It would be ridiculous to plug our ears and pretend they don't exist -- that's how non-technical people end up making the rules about technology that we have to follow, i.e. how we got into a lot of the messes we are in today. Tech nerds like us love to pretend it doesn't matter because it's hard and it involves feelings and emotions and you can't reason your way out of it but we always, always lose big time with that approach.
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      > It was burying our heads in the sand at the very time when it's most critical to be aware of how we and our industry are affected and involved with politics. That's one big problem with politics - it's a weaponized art of crying wolf. Everything, no matter how trivial, is an emergency, and "it's most critical to be aware" of it. Most of those things sort themselves out anyway, and are in fact of little real consequence.
    - late2part 10y ago
      I agree! One thing I loved about living in India was that politics and international issues could be discussed in most any forum, at least in the social/business circle I had there. People didn't feel that differences were bad, and people talked to learn and understand each other.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

eagsalazar2 10y ago

I mean, yes this is awful and shameful but is it really news? It has always been the case that you have virtually no rights when entering or leaving the US especially with regard to protections against unreasonable search and seizure.

throwaway4891a 10y ago
It's awful and shouldn't be normalized: which is the point of the ACLU's argument. If this guy, whom is also a US citizen I might add, is suspected of breaking the law, law enforcement needs to meet the burden of proof of obtaining a warrant and not just walk all over the Constitution.
- wfunction 10y ago
  If I understand correctly, these searches and seizures are occurring before the person is granted entry, which means they have not yet inside the country, nor even shown that they are allowed to be in the country in the first place. To me, it (unfortunately) makes sense that the laws of a country only apply once you've entered it, so I actually can't fault their logic there -- if I were a judge, I would (reluctantly) rule that this logic is fine. What is DO have a problem with, though, is that they seem to have deliberately structured the procedures this way in the first place precisely for this goal. People should be granted/denied entry first, then searched afterward if entry is granted -- because it would seem that their permission to be present inside the country should be independent of what they are allowed to bring into the country. So if the ACLU is fighting against this, I sure hope they're making this argument rather than the first one. Does this make sense, or do people disagree?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - grecy 10y ago
    > To me, it (unfortunately) makes sense that the laws of a country only apply once you've entered it, Are you saying US citizens have zero constitutional rights the second they step out of the US?

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]