Always strive to learn something useful. --Sophocles

Finally! On Wednesday, "Judge Nina Morrison in the Eastern District of New York ruled that cellphone searches are a "nonroutine" search, more akin to a strip search than scanning a suitcase or passing a traveler through a metal detector."

Ultimately, of course, it'll still have to be locked down either through Congressional action, which will result in more challenges and CBP ignoring it, up through the Supreme Court. But for now, if you fly in to JFK, you're probably safe from search. A CBP agent admitted in court that most of the searches were fishing expeditions and most people were quite compliant.

I will still be inclined to power off my phone while passing through the ridiculous hell of customs and immigration while coming back into the country, but this is a great improvement, especially for journalists who work on potentially dangerous stories!

Meanwhile, since Biden is a lame duck, he's said to be working on a set of SCOTUS reforms that includes adding more justices to cover the additional circuit courts that have been added to the country.

https://reason.com/2024/07/26/courts-close-the-loophole-letting-the-feds-search-your-phone-at-the-border/

This guy is a cop of over 30 years experience and he freely admits that police are allowed to lie in the performance of their duties. He served as a consultant on a film called Ten Rules For Dealing With The Police. Here's the ten rules:

1. Always be calm and cool: a bad attitude guarantees a bad outcome.

2. Remain silent: what you don't say can't hurt you.

3. You have the right to refuse searches: saying no to searches can't be held against you.

4. Don't get tricked: remember, police are allowed to lie to you.

5. Determine if you're free to go: police need evidence to detain you.

6. Don't expose yourself: doing dumb stuff in public makes you an easy target.

7. Don't run: they'll catch you and make you regret it.

8. Never touch a cop: aggressive actions will only earn you a more aggressive response.

9. Report misconduct: be a good witness.

10. You don't have to let them in: police need a warrant to enter your home.

The important things to remember are that the police will sometimes use double negatives to get you to trick you in to permitting a search. Stand fast and say "I do not give consent for my car or house to be searched." Don't respond with a yes or no, make a clear and unequivocal statement. Also, don't let them in to your house unless a crime, such as a burglary, has happened. Go outside and stand on the porch. But the main thing is Tip #1: stay cool, a negative attitude guarantees a negative outcome. And #5 is also important, especially in light of these recent illegal searches that police have been doing on travellers, seizing cash that they have no proof that it has been used in a crime.

Oh, and if you are ever taken in for questioning as a suspect in a crime, demand an attorney and don't say a word until one is present. If you talk without one, you're probably screwed. You might be screwed even with one, but not having one pretty much guarantees it.

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/10-tips-avoid-being-tricked-cops

Thanks to silveradept for the link!

Two police cars barricaded a street, forcing drivers in to a small parking lot where contractors hired by the federal government asked them if they'd provide a saliva swab or blood sample or breathalyzer test. They'd be compensated $50 for blood, $10 for saliva, and nothing for the breathalyzer. The lovely consent form stated that their breath had already been scanned passively BEFORE consent was granted.

The parking lot used was on the border of Fort Worth and a suburb, both police departments deny that their officers were used in the event. Which is total BS, all of the modern mobile data terminals gives dispatch accurate position data to improve deploying cars to points where they're needed.

This procedure is going to be conducted in 30 cities over the next three years. They're reportedly studying drug and alcohol use in drivers. No statement what would happen if a person blew positive for alcohol.

So if you get pulled over and don't want to participate, don't. Don't even blow in the intoxylizer. The two questions are "Am I being detained?" and "Am I free to leave?", and if you don't like the answer, "I want to see the warrant."

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/North-Texas-Drivers-Stopped-at-Roadblock-Asked-for-Saliva-Blood-232438621.html

NSL's are investigative tools used by the FBI to "fight terrorism". They go to an internet service provider, or a bank, or a library, and slap down the letter requesting information about a customer/client. The letter not only requires information, but is also a gag order on discussing it.

This particular case has a heck of a twist. An ISP was issued an NSL and appealed. "After the telecom challenged the NSL, the Justice Department took its own extraordinary measure and sued the company, arguing in court documents that the company was violating the law by challenging its authority."

The EFF was working with the ISP to challenge the NSL ASAP, IYKWIM. And a judge said there were lots of problems with them and has banned them, but the government has 90 days to appeal to the 9th Circuit.

I'm sure this will end up in the SCOTUS, one way or another. And it really needs to be exposed there, because unlike a search warrant, the FBI doesn't need a judge or demonstrated probable cause to get an NSL. They've been abused in the past, they're a bad tool, and they should be banned.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/03/nsl-found-unconstitutional/

Case in Florida where a drug-sniffing dog, outside of someone's house, alerted, so the cops got a warrant and raided the house, finding drugs.

The issue is whether the dog was an unreasonable detection device. There were cases in California where police used thermal imaging cameras to detect hot rooms in residences where people were using heat lamps to grow pot. It was ruled to be an invasive search mechanism and the cases were thrown out. The defendant is claiming that the dog is a similar such device.

A comment posted the obvious counter-move: toss unused/scrap/dregs marijuana in front of other people's houses to increase the rate of false positives. I'd be sure to include the houses of the mayor and police chief if I did such a thing.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/01/scotus-dog-sniffing-case/

He bought it from the brother of his girlfriend, said brother later fled to Mexico and may be involved in the drug trade. The guy lives with the parents of his girlfriend. He thinks the Feds may think that since they guy he bought the SUV from might be a drug dealer, that he might be. Classic guilt by association.

The story gets flat-out weird and a little scary when Wired shows up to photograph the devices and three marked police cars show up. Someone's phone apparently was also tapped.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/gps-tracker-times-two/all/1

and they use it at routine traffic stops. The ACLU is suing them for Fourth Amendment violation.

"A US Department of Justice test of the CelleBrite UFED used by Michigan police found the device could grab all of the photos and video off of an iPhone within one-and-a-half minutes. The device works with 3000 different phone models and can even defeat password protections.

"Complete extraction of existing, hidden, and deleted phone data, including call history, text messages, contacts, images, and geotags," a CelleBrite brochure explains regarding the device's capabilities. "The Physical Analyzer allows visualization of both existing and deleted locations on Google Earth. In addition, location information from GPS devices and image geotags can be mapped on Google Maps.""

Man, I hope the ACLU wins on this one. This is entirely too much power too easily used without having reasonable suspicion and a proper search warrant. I'm also curious how well this works against a fully-encrypted Android OS phone.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp

http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/04/19/2231240/Michigan-Police-Could-Search-Cell-Phones-During-Traffic-Stops

(August 20, 2010) US legislators want to know why US Marshalls Service stored images of body scans taken at a Florida courthouse. Senators Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) sent a letter to the agency expressing their concern that citizens' privacy may have been violated.

The letter was also signed by Senators Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), Thomas Carper (D-Delaware), Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia) and Johnny Isakson (R-Georgia). The images stored were not accessed until the agency received a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). The Marshalls service says the images are not available without an administrative password. Despite the Marshall Service assurance that details were fuzzy enough so that people could not be identified, even by gender, the legislators want to know why the images were saved, if there are any other locations where full body imaging technology is being used, whether images from those locations are being stored, and if so, why.

http://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ng_20100820_1563.php?oref=topnews

http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Press.MajorityNews&ContentRecord_id=8c23ed55-5056-8059-761a-a21459c5b48f