Spoliation requires a situation where a legal case is reasonably foreseeable. It's reasonable to ask exactly what that foreseeable legal case would be in this s

Spoliation requires a situation where a legal case is reasonably foreseeable. It's reasonable to ask exactly what that foreseeable legal case would be in this situation. "We will jail if you don't comply" is questionable grounds. There has to be explicit suspicion of something specific. Otherwise it's a fishing expedition, and questionably lawful. Do the TSA and CBP get more latitude? Yes, but only up to a point. And that point is constantly being challenged. It is not the same as resisting a lawful search. That's more likely to be obstruction. It also not the same as deleting evidence when you're on notice that a case against you is incoming. That is legally much more straightforward. Of course the reality is this government DGAF about freedom or constitutional rights. It has already shot people in the streets in cold blood for no good reason. So this is a risky move. But... there's been significant judicial pushback against overreach. Ultimately it's a constitutional issue, but different states have different policies and attitudes to that. https://www.hornwright.com/civil-rights-law/illegal-search-seizure/illegal-search-and-seizure-in-airports-and-borde/ https://www.hornwright.com/civil-rights-law/illegal-search-s...