4 ms·

The US extends the border-search exception to anywhere within 100 miles of an airport with international fights, meaning something like 60% of the US lives with

The US extends the border-search exception to anywhere within 100 miles of an airport with international fights, meaning something like 60% of the US lives within a "border zone" as most international airports are close to dense population centers.

djrogers 9y ago
This is tangential, and I'm sure you didn't mean to, but you've come close to implying that a CBP agent can stop, search, and detain anyone within 100 miles of an International airport. That's not the case, it would have to be someone who actually crossed the border in to the USA. That said, and I can' believe I have to make this disclaimer as it feels about as obvious as saying I'm against torturing kittens, but I am against the overreaching searches the EFF and ACLU are suing over here.
- tbrownaw 9y ago
  it would have to be someone who actually crossed the border ... And if they want to detain you, who gets to decide whether that happened?
  - lovich 9y ago
    It's fine they just have to check your papers real quick. Also, never question if they can do that unless you want to be arrested for resisting arrest
- halostatue 9y ago
  Except that, in practice, that’s precisely what CBP interior checkpoints are. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_interior_checkpoints https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_in... The DHS/CBP regulations claim 100 miles from a border and/or international airport, but the Supreme Court has (so far) held that warrantless searches in this case apply only at borders and their functional equivalents. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception)
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
  > CBP agent can stop, search, and detain anyone within 100 miles of an International airport. This assumes a sequence of events that never occurs in reality. CBP / LEO attempts to detain you > The Law pops it's head out from behind a bush and wags it's finger > CBP / LEO sees this and thinks 'oh, of course, silly me, that's not allowed' > you go about your day. In reality: CBP / LEO believes* they have sufficient reason to detain you > your day is fucked. They'll probably rough handle you, stomp on your head, and generally be degenerate asshats. There's no one present to advocate for and protect your rights.
wonderous 9y ago
Despite federal law allowing certain federal agents to conduct search and seizures within 100 miles of the border into the interior of the United States,[5] the Supreme Court has clearly and repeatedly confirmed that the border search exception applies only at international borders and their functional equivalent (such as international airports).[1] [2] [1] https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6933260753627774699 https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=693326075362777... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Martinez-Fuerte https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Martinez-Fu...
- throwawayjava 9y ago
  Right. This is something that people often miss when they say ridiculous things are illegal. The whole point of judicial review is that just because the legislature says something is legal/illegal, doesn't mean it actually is.
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  Meanwhile, CBP recently ran a roadblock on Interstate 93 in New Hampshire, ostensibly to catch undocumented migrants, but the majority of arrests were of US citizens, and the majority of those US citizens were arrested for -- surprise! -- drugs found when they or their vehicles were searched: http://www.concordmonitor.com/New-Hampshire-interstate-border-patrol-checkpoint-drugs-legal-debate-12162389 http://www.concordmonitor.com/New-Hampshire-interstate-borde... As the article notes, essentially the entire state of New Hampshire falls within a the 100-mile border zone in which CBP claims no warrant is needed. Perhaps you should forward your HN comments to those officers to clarify what they are and aren't allowed to do in that zone.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
    You're right. The law has very little bearing on what law enforcement officers can and can't do. Any number of courts can rule that a particular LEO activity is unlawful, but it seems to have very little effect on their actions henceforth. In my experience, so long as the officers believe they were acting lawfully there are typically no repercussions. Occasionally one might get put on leave with full pay while an investigation is carried out. What kind of disincentive is that supposed to be? I definitely believe there needs to be a third party to police operations. Some sort of service tasked with keeping police behaviour in check, present to support the rights of the citizenry. Law enforcement officers shouldn't be allowed out alone.

djrogers 9y ago

This is tangential, and I'm sure you didn't mean to, but you've come close to implying that a CBP agent can stop, search, and detain anyone within 100 miles of an International airport. That's not the case, it would have to be someone who actually crossed the border in to the USA. That said, and I can' believe I have to make this disclaimer as it feels about as obvious as saying I'm against torturing kittens, but I am against the overreaching searches the EFF and ACLU are suing over here.

tbrownaw 9y ago
it would have to be someone who actually crossed the border ... And if they want to detain you, who gets to decide whether that happened?
- lovich 9y ago
  It's fine they just have to check your papers real quick. Also, never question if they can do that unless you want to be arrested for resisting arrest
halostatue 9y ago
Except that, in practice, that’s precisely what CBP interior checkpoints are. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_interior_checkpoints https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_in... The DHS/CBP regulations claim 100 miles from a border and/or international airport, but the Supreme Court has (so far) held that warrantless searches in this case apply only at borders and their functional equivalents. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception)
TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
> CBP agent can stop, search, and detain anyone within 100 miles of an International airport. This assumes a sequence of events that never occurs in reality. CBP / LEO attempts to detain you > The Law pops it's head out from behind a bush and wags it's finger > CBP / LEO sees this and thinks 'oh, of course, silly me, that's not allowed' > you go about your day. In reality: CBP / LEO believes* they have sufficient reason to detain you > your day is fucked. They'll probably rough handle you, stomp on your head, and generally be degenerate asshats. There's no one present to advocate for and protect your rights.

wonderous 9y ago

Despite federal law allowing certain federal agents to conduct search and seizures within 100 miles of the border into the interior of the United States,[5] the Supreme Court has clearly and repeatedly confirmed that the border search exception applies only at international borders and their functional equivalent (such as international airports).[1] [2] [1] https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6933260753627774699 https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=693326075362777... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Martinez-Fuerte https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Martinez-Fu...

throwawayjava 9y ago
Right. This is something that people often miss when they say ridiculous things are illegal. The whole point of judicial review is that just because the legislature says something is legal/illegal, doesn't mean it actually is.
ubernostrum 9y ago
Meanwhile, CBP recently ran a roadblock on Interstate 93 in New Hampshire, ostensibly to catch undocumented migrants, but the majority of arrests were of US citizens, and the majority of those US citizens were arrested for -- surprise! -- drugs found when they or their vehicles were searched: http://www.concordmonitor.com/New-Hampshire-interstate-border-patrol-checkpoint-drugs-legal-debate-12162389 http://www.concordmonitor.com/New-Hampshire-interstate-borde... As the article notes, essentially the entire state of New Hampshire falls within a the 100-mile border zone in which CBP claims no warrant is needed. Perhaps you should forward your HN comments to those officers to clarify what they are and aren't allowed to do in that zone.
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
  You're right. The law has very little bearing on what law enforcement officers can and can't do. Any number of courts can rule that a particular LEO activity is unlawful, but it seems to have very little effect on their actions henceforth. In my experience, so long as the officers believe they were acting lawfully there are typically no repercussions. Occasionally one might get put on leave with full pay while an investigation is carried out. What kind of disincentive is that supposed to be? I definitely believe there needs to be a third party to police operations. Some sort of service tasked with keeping police behaviour in check, present to support the rights of the citizenry. Law enforcement officers shouldn't be allowed out alone.