CrimPro meets border policy courtesy of child pornography. Why an apparent court victory for digital privacy rights might be a 21st century Trojan horse, and its impact on the Canada-U.S. border security and trade relationship.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held today (United States of America v. Cotterman) that reasonable suspicion is needed to forensically examine electronic devices seized during a border search (and not risk having any incriminating evidence kicked out of court).
OK, boiled down: The 9th put up red light to a "computer strip search" without reasonable suspicion.
Might not sound like a big deal, but this decision reflects an interesting development in the suspicionless searches of personal property (yes, there are times law enforcement officers can search your stuff without showing an iota of cause).
Oh, and it might just impact America's border security and trade policies.
Disclaimer: I haven't fully digested, let alone have the expertise of others, like the Brennan Center for Justice, to fully assess this case. The post, found after the jump, simply highlights:
- even a cursory read of the decision's summary suggests that this decision reflects something more complicated than a 'win' or 'lose' for digital privacy rights, and
- perhaps the most important aspect of the case, whether giving heightened protection against computer strip searches impacts U.S. border security, gets shockingly short attention by the Court.
