3 ms·

How is it a myth? https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/06/13/what-is-usa-border-enforcement-zone/ https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/06/13/what-is-usa-border-en...

How is it a myth? https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/06/13/what-is-usa-border-enforcement-zone/ https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/06/13/what-is-usa-border-en... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception https://www.pennstatelawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/3-Anthony-100-Mile-Zone.pdf https://www.pennstatelawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/0... https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1032&context=sjlcr https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?ar... https://www.truthorfiction.com/supreme-court-100-miles-border-ruling/ https://www.truthorfiction.com/supreme-court-100-miles-borde... https://brownpoliticalreview.org/constitution-100-miles-questionable-nature-u-s-interior-checkpoints/ https://brownpoliticalreview.org/constitution-100-miles-ques... https://ballsandstrikes.org/legal-culture/border-patrol-100-mile-zone-explainer/ https://ballsandstrikes.org/legal-culture/border-patrol-100-...

tptacek 1y ago
Read the Penn State Law Review article you just pasted. Nobody's questioning whether CBP itself acts abusively within the US. As the law review article observes, CBP's abuses have little to do with the "100 mile" thing; they detained Sen. Patrick Leahy by the side of the road more than 100 miles way from any nominal border. The article goes into great detail about what the courts have authorized; it's nothing like ACLU's claim. This is one area in which I think ACLU's advocacy is actively harmful: they're convincing people that the USG has statutory authorization to do things, things they actually do, for which they in fact have no authorization.
- ranger_danger 1y ago
  I did, and: > Originating in a decades-old federal statute, CBP has the authority to conduct stops and searches within a “reasonable distance” of a border, defined by regulation as 100 miles. Does not sound like a myth to me... https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/287.1 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/287.1 In fact this seems to say that not only is a 100-mile zone actually defined in law, but there are cases where more than 100 miles may be acceptable as well. Am I missing something?
  - tptacek 1y ago
    The entire "legal analysis" section of the article, I think? It's hard for me to engage with a single sentence from the opening of the article, when the entire article is about the illegitimacy of CBP's interpretation of that statute. In particular, repeatedly throughout the entire article the author refutes your assertion that searches are authorized by the INA.
    - ranger_danger 1y ago
      How about this then... can we agree that CBP searches outside of a posted border crossing within 100 miles of a land border, appears to be a contested and unsettled issue that may be subject to the whims of the judge of each case, but cannot clearly be defined objectively as "a myth" like you put it. Is that sufficient for you?
      - tptacek 1y ago
        No? You just said "how about this: I reject your argument". That's fine, we don't have to agree, but let's not pretend that we agree when we don't. What was said on this thread about the "100 mile zone" was wrong. It was wrong according to your own cite! (I just happened to have already read it, because, as I said, this comes up on HN a bunch). What's funny is: depending on which ACLU page you hit, they don't even agree with themselves. Their new main "100 mile border" page is full of caveats, but their original 2014-vintage page, which is still on the first Google SERP, claims things like CBP authorization to search luggage within the "100 mile zone" (definitely no! do they do it? i'm sure they do; just not lawfully).
        ranger_danger 1y ago
        We must be having some kind of disagreement on what "the 100 mile zone" even is then, because I thought the 8 CFR 287 link explicitly defined it. Can you please elaborate on exactly what it is you are claiming is a myth and why? I'd like to understand your point of view better. And if this is indeed a settled issue as I believe you are claiming, can you cite any court cases that establish whether (whatever you claim is a myth) is actually legal or illegal?

tptacek 1y ago

Read the Penn State Law Review article you just pasted. Nobody's questioning whether CBP itself acts abusively within the US. As the law review article observes, CBP's abuses have little to do with the "100 mile" thing; they detained Sen. Patrick Leahy by the side of the road more than 100 miles way from any nominal border. The article goes into great detail about what the courts have authorized; it's nothing like ACLU's claim. This is one area in which I think ACLU's advocacy is actively harmful: they're convincing people that the USG has statutory authorization to do things, things they actually do, for which they in fact have no authorization.

ranger_danger 1y ago
I did, and: > Originating in a decades-old federal statute, CBP has the authority to conduct stops and searches within a “reasonable distance” of a border, defined by regulation as 100 miles. Does not sound like a myth to me... https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/287.1 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/287.1 In fact this seems to say that not only is a 100-mile zone actually defined in law, but there are cases where more than 100 miles may be acceptable as well. Am I missing something?
- tptacek 1y ago
  The entire "legal analysis" section of the article, I think? It's hard for me to engage with a single sentence from the opening of the article, when the entire article is about the illegitimacy of CBP's interpretation of that statute. In particular, repeatedly throughout the entire article the author refutes your assertion that searches are authorized by the INA.
  - ranger_danger 1y ago
    How about this then... can we agree that CBP searches outside of a posted border crossing within 100 miles of a land border, appears to be a contested and unsettled issue that may be subject to the whims of the judge of each case, but cannot clearly be defined objectively as "a myth" like you put it. Is that sufficient for you?
    - tptacek 1y ago
      No? You just said "how about this: I reject your argument". That's fine, we don't have to agree, but let's not pretend that we agree when we don't. What was said on this thread about the "100 mile zone" was wrong. It was wrong according to your own cite! (I just happened to have already read it, because, as I said, this comes up on HN a bunch). What's funny is: depending on which ACLU page you hit, they don't even agree with themselves. Their new main "100 mile border" page is full of caveats, but their original 2014-vintage page, which is still on the first Google SERP, claims things like CBP authorization to search luggage within the "100 mile zone" (definitely no! do they do it? i'm sure they do; just not lawfully).
      - ranger_danger 1y ago
        We must be having some kind of disagreement on what "the 100 mile zone" even is then, because I thought the 8 CFR 287 link explicitly defined it. Can you please elaborate on exactly what it is you are claiming is a myth and why? I'd like to understand your point of view better. And if this is indeed a settled issue as I believe you are claiming, can you cite any court cases that establish whether (whatever you claim is a myth) is actually legal or illegal?