You are wrong. Airports are not in the USA, so USA laws don't apply there. They can do whatever they wish, but they obviously generally act along the lines of acceptability. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Correct. Warrants aren’t needed at border crossings, since customs represents reasonable search and seizure.
The premise is that it’s not unreasonable to consider smuggling as a common behavior at border crossings, and civilian citizens are only protected from an unreasonable search by the fourth amendment.
They can hold you for long periods of time, irradiate you with x-rays and inspect bodily cavities with gloved fingers, or have medical personnel do it for them, and that’s all considered “reasonable” given the context of an international boundary.
> Airports are not in the USA, so USA laws don't apply there.
Airports at which customs agents search entrants to the USA are, in fact, in the USA and US laws absolutely do apply there. But there are lots of conditions, including search incident to border crossing, where warrants are not required for a search to be reasonable (and thus legal) in US law.
The premise is that it’s not unreasonable to consider smuggling as a common behavior at border crossings, and civilian citizens are only protected from an unreasonable search by the fourth amendment.
They can hold you for long periods of time, irradiate you with x-rays and inspect bodily cavities with gloved fingers, or have medical personnel do it for them, and that’s all considered “reasonable” given the context of an international boundary.