Federal Appeals Court Limits Warrantless Border Confiscation and Searches of Mobile DevicesJoe Wright The ruling makes clear that there should be reasonable suspicion; a ruling by the full 9th Circuit that overturned a previous ruling by a three judge panel: Very few people are aware that in a country supposedly protected by a Constitution enumerating liberties such as freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, there exists a 100-mile-wide ring around the entire nation that the ACLU has called a Constitution Free Zone. It is here that government has tried hardest to test the limits of its authority. This zone lies within the realm of border protection and permits otherwise unconstitutional actions such as inland checkpoints, drones, license plate tracking, biometric data collection, and DNA collection, all without a warrant. DHS sought to add digital searches and confiscation to the list. When it comes to civil liberties, Homeland Security cares, which is why they have their own office to oversee its activities, called theThe Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at the Department of Homeland Security. Orwell would be proud of its name and function. Americans have long come to accept that when encountering a foreign border in their travels, it is OK for agents to physically and electronically examine ones baggage and other personal effects; we have been well trained that we are all guilty until proven innocent by the state until permitted to proceed. As ArsTechnica previously reported, if a laptop or other digital device is part of your personal effects, DHS attempted to assert that not only should the device be superficially examined, but any files on that device could also be examined. This not only crushes the 4th Amendment, but potentially the First as well: If this sounds a bit convoluted and doublespeaky to you and you might want further clarification you cant have it. Thats right, the office that cares so much about your civil liberties and privacy has offered only an executive summary, but the full report is off limits. In a further troubling side note, DHS has issued a grant of $583,000 to the University of Alabama to develop technology to track all mobile devices, laptops and tablets. This technology will offer a full chronology of location history and prevent forging of that history. It, like other high-tech security initiatives, is being developed for use in protecting government buildings and agencies. But if history offers any lessons, it is that this technology just like biometric ID will trickle down rather rapidly into the everyday lives of Americans with or without a Constitution. The 9th Circuit U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at least has stated that they will not permit the government to examine and confiscate the files of Americans presumed to be innocent. Reasonable suspicion must be established. However, the Washington Times also notes that reasonable suspicion is a lower standard than probable cause which would require a search warrant before data can be examined and retained. Nevertheless, the court has ruled that password-protected files are exactly what the Constitutions framers had in mind when they wrote the Fourth Amendment protecting Americans papers from unreasonable searches. Privacy advocates still need to be exceedingly vigilant about this issue; but this is, for the moment, a pause in the march to full-blown tyranny. Incidentally, this ruling did not help Howard Cotterman, the defendant in the case that actually sparked the debate. Main source for this update: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130208/17415621927/homeland-security-not-searching-your-laptop-doesnt-benefit-your-civil-liberties-so-we-can-do-it.shtml https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/finally-some-limit-electronic-searches-border Read5 Mandatory Steps For Protecting Data From Eavesdroppers Read other articles byJoe Wright Here 