5 ms·

> I had thought (and Supreme Court ruled) you could not be compelled to unlock an encrypted device, which is why I always powered mined down before crossing. D

> I had thought (and Supreme Court ruled) you could not be compelled to unlock an encrypted device, which is why I always powered mined down before crossing. Does that apply to non-citizens? If a CBP officer doesn't like you as a non-citizen, like your lack of cooperation during an interview, they could just deny your visa and your entry into the US. If you're a citizen, they can't deny your re-entry. They can delay you for however long and ruin your day and even keep your devices, but you get to go home.

phoronixrly 5mo ago
I think assuming that the CBP will adhere to the law is based on a pretty outdated mindset. I'd say at least since the current management, but more likely since 9/11...
- thankyoufriend 5mo ago
  I'd even call it a delusional mindset. For context, CBP and ICE were both formed in 2003. Jenn Budd has several books on this topic if you want to understand why a growing number of people want to abolish CBP, ICE, and even the entire DHS, which itself was formed only a year prior in 2002. These are very recent organizations in our nation's history, and if we're fine putting things like the Dpt of Education on the chopping block, why not DHS?
  - asveikau 5mo ago
    I personally remember that people were calling the DHS a mistake since 2002. I also, as a DC native, was utterly shocked when I first heard "normies" taking DHS seriously as an entity. A friend mentioned DHS was hiring, and I thought to myself ... "wait, but isn't that place bullshit?" Among a certain set of people, it had a bad reputation from day one.
gruez 5mo ago
>> I had thought (and Supreme Court ruled) you could not be compelled to unlock an encrypted device >Does that apply to non-citizens? If a CBP officer doesn't like you as a non-citizen, like your lack of cooperation during an interview, they could just deny your visa and your entry into the US. That's exactly what "you could not be compelled to unlock an encrypted device" means? You won't get sent to the gulag for refusing to, but entry into the US was always conditional with very little room for recourse if the border agent doesn't like you.
- dylan604 5mo ago
  Not really sure what you're arguing, but it's not an answer to my question
  - gruez 5mo ago
    You don't "have to", but they can deport you and refuse entry in the future in retaliation. It's a variant of the TSA not being able to "compel" you to a search, but they can refuse you from flying.
    - deleted 5mo ago
      [deleted]
    - DANmode 5mo ago
      They can lie, and pretend you’re uncooperative, or that their investigation took longer than the duration until your intended flight, but, no, they can’t legally refuse you from flying without cause or suspicion.
    - two_handfuls 5mo ago
      The question was: "Does that apply to non-citizens?" Saying "they can deport you" without specifying whether the hypothetical "you" is a citizen or not means you did not answer the question. Not that you have to answer a stranger's question, but I thought I would clear the confusion in the hope it may be helpful.
      - gruez 5mo ago
        The premise (non-citizen) is in the question and doesn't need to be repeated. C'mon, this isn't grade school where you have to answer questions by first restating the question in its entirety.
        dylan604 5mo ago
        No, but even in grade school, the teacher would get the student to actually answer the question when it is clearly being evaded. Or maybe put the student's name on the board for wasting everyone's time for being obstinate.
huslage 5mo ago
It ONLY applies to citizens. The CBP cannot deny an American citizen entry into the country for any reason. They cannot compel a citizen to unlock their devices. All bets are off for non-citizens, sadly.
- LocalH 5mo ago
  > The CBP cannot deny an American citizen entry into the country for any reason. They cannot compel a citizen to unlock their devices. Don't worry, they're working on ending birthright citizenship
  - SR2Z 5mo ago
    They're gonna have to enforce that one at gunpoint
- NoImmatureAdHom 5mo ago
  Actually, I'm not sure they can compel non-citizens. If you want in, you might have to give them the keys. But if you would rather not enter, would they compel on pain of imprisonment? The U.S. isn't China or the UK.
  - piva00 5mo ago
    In my experience going through the border in China is more pleasant than through the USA, never had a hiccup in China while I've been detained for hours without contact with the outside going through a transit in JFK.
    - NoImmatureAdHom 5mo ago
      The vast majority of people from the developed world have no problems going through any border in the developed world. Your experience is probably representative, but that's not what we're talking about. My understanding is that de facto you have no rights at all in China. The Americans take this sort of thing very seriously, which is why it's in the news and talked about. Some guy gets imprisoned for 37 days for a meme (and is subsequently paid $835k by gov't for his trouble) and it's all Greg Lukianoff can talk about. [0] [0]: https://substack.com/@glukianoff/note/c-262196255 https://substack.com/@glukianoff/note/c-262196255
ChrisMarshallNY 5mo ago
Here's a fun story from about 20 years ago: https://www.wired.com/2007/04/canadian-psycho/ https://www.wired.com/2007/04/canadian-psycho/ Spiteful border agents is not a new thing (I love the URL shortening).
testing22321 5mo ago
> but you get to go home Not always. They must admit you, but they can arrest you one second later
- kelnos 5mo ago
  They still need to charge you with something. If they can't, they can't hold you. Yes, I know, they can theoretically do whatever they want, but realistically it would take the most spiteful of spiteful agents to arrest you without cause (just because you refused to unlock your device). Just the act of doing this would create a lot of extra work and paperwork for the agent that most of them are not going to want to deal with. Plus, asserting your rights is a sign to them that you aren't a pushover and aren't going to get trampled on easily. The bullies prefer easier targets, usually.
  - testing22321 5mo ago
    Cue all the people that get thrown in jail for 48 hours without being charged at all, or those arrested for resisting arrest… for resisting arrest.

phoronixrly 5mo ago

I think assuming that the CBP will adhere to the law is based on a pretty outdated mindset. I'd say at least since the current management, but more likely since 9/11...

thankyoufriend 5mo ago
I'd even call it a delusional mindset. For context, CBP and ICE were both formed in 2003. Jenn Budd has several books on this topic if you want to understand why a growing number of people want to abolish CBP, ICE, and even the entire DHS, which itself was formed only a year prior in 2002. These are very recent organizations in our nation's history, and if we're fine putting things like the Dpt of Education on the chopping block, why not DHS?
- asveikau 5mo ago
  I personally remember that people were calling the DHS a mistake since 2002. I also, as a DC native, was utterly shocked when I first heard "normies" taking DHS seriously as an entity. A friend mentioned DHS was hiring, and I thought to myself ... "wait, but isn't that place bullshit?" Among a certain set of people, it had a bad reputation from day one.

gruez 5mo ago

>> I had thought (and Supreme Court ruled) you could not be compelled to unlock an encrypted device >Does that apply to non-citizens? If a CBP officer doesn't like you as a non-citizen, like your lack of cooperation during an interview, they could just deny your visa and your entry into the US. That's exactly what "you could not be compelled to unlock an encrypted device" means? You won't get sent to the gulag for refusing to, but entry into the US was always conditional with very little room for recourse if the border agent doesn't like you.

dylan604 5mo ago
Not really sure what you're arguing, but it's not an answer to my question
- gruez 5mo ago
  You don't "have to", but they can deport you and refuse entry in the future in retaliation. It's a variant of the TSA not being able to "compel" you to a search, but they can refuse you from flying.
  - deleted 5mo ago
    [deleted]
  - DANmode 5mo ago
    They can lie, and pretend you’re uncooperative, or that their investigation took longer than the duration until your intended flight, but, no, they can’t legally refuse you from flying without cause or suspicion.
  - two_handfuls 5mo ago
    The question was: "Does that apply to non-citizens?" Saying "they can deport you" without specifying whether the hypothetical "you" is a citizen or not means you did not answer the question. Not that you have to answer a stranger's question, but I thought I would clear the confusion in the hope it may be helpful.
    - gruez 5mo ago
      The premise (non-citizen) is in the question and doesn't need to be repeated. C'mon, this isn't grade school where you have to answer questions by first restating the question in its entirety.
      - dylan604 5mo ago
        No, but even in grade school, the teacher would get the student to actually answer the question when it is clearly being evaded. Or maybe put the student's name on the board for wasting everyone's time for being obstinate.

huslage 5mo ago

It ONLY applies to citizens. The CBP cannot deny an American citizen entry into the country for any reason. They cannot compel a citizen to unlock their devices. All bets are off for non-citizens, sadly.

LocalH 5mo ago
> The CBP cannot deny an American citizen entry into the country for any reason. They cannot compel a citizen to unlock their devices. Don't worry, they're working on ending birthright citizenship
- SR2Z 5mo ago
  They're gonna have to enforce that one at gunpoint
NoImmatureAdHom 5mo ago
Actually, I'm not sure they can compel non-citizens. If you want in, you might have to give them the keys. But if you would rather not enter, would they compel on pain of imprisonment? The U.S. isn't China or the UK.
- piva00 5mo ago
  In my experience going through the border in China is more pleasant than through the USA, never had a hiccup in China while I've been detained for hours without contact with the outside going through a transit in JFK.
  - NoImmatureAdHom 5mo ago
    The vast majority of people from the developed world have no problems going through any border in the developed world. Your experience is probably representative, but that's not what we're talking about. My understanding is that de facto you have no rights at all in China. The Americans take this sort of thing very seriously, which is why it's in the news and talked about. Some guy gets imprisoned for 37 days for a meme (and is subsequently paid $835k by gov't for his trouble) and it's all Greg Lukianoff can talk about. [0] [0]: https://substack.com/@glukianoff/note/c-262196255 https://substack.com/@glukianoff/note/c-262196255

ChrisMarshallNY 5mo ago

Here's a fun story from about 20 years ago: https://www.wired.com/2007/04/canadian-psycho/ https://www.wired.com/2007/04/canadian-psycho/ Spiteful border agents is not a new thing (I love the URL shortening).

testing22321 5mo ago

> but you get to go home Not always. They must admit you, but they can arrest you one second later

kelnos 5mo ago
They still need to charge you with something. If they can't, they can't hold you. Yes, I know, they can theoretically do whatever they want, but realistically it would take the most spiteful of spiteful agents to arrest you without cause (just because you refused to unlock your device). Just the act of doing this would create a lot of extra work and paperwork for the agent that most of them are not going to want to deal with. Plus, asserting your rights is a sign to them that you aren't a pushover and aren't going to get trampled on easily. The bullies prefer easier targets, usually.
- testing22321 5mo ago
  Cue all the people that get thrown in jail for 48 hours without being charged at all, or those arrested for resisting arrest… for resisting arrest.