[dylan604]

> I had thought (and Supreme Court ruled) you could not be compelled to unlock an encrypted device, which is why I always powered mined down before crossing.

Does that apply to non-citizens? If a CBP officer doesn't like you as a non-citizen, like your lack of cooperation during an interview, they could just deny your visa and your entry into the US. If you're a citizen, they can't deny your re-entry. They can delay you for however long and ruin your day and even keep your devices, but you get to go home.

[huslage]

It ONLY applies to citizens. The CBP cannot deny an American citizen entry into the country for any reason. They cannot compel a citizen to unlock their devices. All bets are off for non-citizens, sadly.

[LocalH]

> The CBP cannot deny an American citizen entry into the country for any reason. They cannot compel a citizen to unlock their devices.

Don't worry, they're working on ending birthright citizenship

[SR2Z]

They're gonna have to enforce that one at gunpoint

[NoImmatureAdHom]

Actually, I'm not sure they can compel non-citizens. If you want in, you might have to give them the keys. But if you would rather not enter, would they compel on pain of imprisonment?

The U.S. isn't China or the UK.

[ndsipa_pomu]

UK citizen here and I've never had any issue with flying in/out of UK with several electronic devices (phone, laptop, tablet, steamdeck etc). Never even been asked to power them on or demonstrate them working (i.e. to show that they're not a bomb disguised as a laptop) and don't know anyone else that's had any hassle getting back in the country. I've been selected for being swabbed for explosives a few times though, but even that only takes a minute and is hardly any inconvenience.

In my experience, Australia was the most difficult country to get into as they are (now) very careful about bringing in any plant seeds or fruit, but the security staff were very friendly and helpful. I had to spend a while explaining that I did have some bananas in my bag previously which was why the cute sniffer dog was interested in it.

[NoImmatureAdHom]

Your personal experience is probably representative in that invasive searches happen to very few people, but that's not the issue at hand. The fact remains that the British will imprison you for refusing to decrypt your stuff (or for refusing to answer their questions):

https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/advice_information/exa...

[mrkstu]

Australia is annoying. Israel is by far the worst- UK is bad in theory since they can jail you to compel an unlock, but obviously is going to happen to a vanishingly small number of people…

[chopin]

Same experience with Australia. Japan is very painless, as well. Friendly, helpful staff on both.

[piva00]

In my experience going through the border in China is more pleasant than through the USA, never had a hiccup in China while I've been detained for hours without contact with the outside going through a transit in JFK.

[NoImmatureAdHom]

The vast majority of people from the developed world have no problems going through any border in the developed world. Your experience is probably representative, but that's not what we're talking about. My understanding is that de facto you have no rights at all in China. The Americans take this sort of thing very seriously, which is why it's in the news and talked about. Some guy gets imprisoned for 37 days for a meme (and is subsequently paid $835k by gov't for his trouble) and it's all Greg Lukianoff can talk about. [0]

[0]: https://substack.com/@glukianoff/note/c-262196255

[majorchord]

Yet Japan, a country the West fetishizes regularly, routinely jails people for 20 days with no contact or even any charges at all, often ruining their lives, while desperately trying to force a confession no matter how innocent you are, then (hopefully) turning them loose, and not many people seem to care about that.

[ThePowerOfFuet]

>The U.S. isn't China or the UK.

Wasn't. Past tense.

[mixdup]

They can't prevent you from entering the country. You do not have an unlimited right to bring items into the country with you, though. They can absolutely prevent you from bringing your phone across the border if you decline to unlock it

[kelnos]

> They can absolutely prevent you from bringing your phone across the border if you decline to unlock it

Under what grounds?

[mixdup]

Customs law? You have an absolute right to return to the country as a citizen. You do not have an absolute right to bring whatever you want into the country, even as a citizen so they can search your belongings to see if you are carrying contraband. It's a different set of rules than if you're just on the street already in the country, crossing a border customs has a lot of leeway

I'm not saying that I agree with it, it's just the way it is

[laken]

The directive linked in the literal OP you're commenting under. (section 5.41 in that directive)

[ChrisMarshallNY]

Here's a fun story from about 20 years ago: https://www.wired.com/2007/04/canadian-psycho/

Spiteful border agents is not a new thing (I love the URL shortening).

[gruez]

>> I had thought (and Supreme Court ruled) you could not be compelled to unlock an encrypted device

>Does that apply to non-citizens? If a CBP officer doesn't like you as a non-citizen, like your lack of cooperation during an interview, they could just deny your visa and your entry into the US.

That's exactly what "you could not be compelled to unlock an encrypted device" means? You won't get sent to the gulag for refusing to, but entry into the US was always conditional with very little room for recourse if the border agent doesn't like you.

[dylan604]

Not really sure what you're arguing, but it's not an answer to my question

[gruez]

You don't "have to", but they can deport you and refuse entry in the future in retaliation. It's a variant of the TSA not being able to "compel" you to a search, but they can refuse you from flying.

[DANmode]

They can lie, and pretend you’re uncooperative,

or that their investigation took longer than the duration until your intended flight,

but, no, they can’t legally refuse you from flying without cause or suspicion.

[two_handfuls]

The question was: "Does that apply to non-citizens?"

Saying "they can deport you" without specifying whether the hypothetical "you" is a citizen or not means you did not answer the question.

Not that you have to answer a stranger's question, but I thought I would clear the confusion in the hope it may be helpful.

[gruez]

The premise (non-citizen) is in the question and doesn't need to be repeated. C'mon, this isn't grade school where you have to answer questions by first restating the question in its entirety.

[dylan604]

No, but even in grade school, the teacher would get the student to actually answer the question when it is clearly being evaded. Or maybe put the student's name on the board for wasting everyone's time for being obstinate.

[testing22321]

> but you get to go home

Not always.

They must admit you, but they can arrest you one second later

[kelnos]

They still need to charge you with something. If they can't, they can't hold you.

Yes, I know, they can theoretically do whatever they want, but realistically it would take the most spiteful of spiteful agents to arrest you without cause (just because you refused to unlock your device). Just the act of doing this would create a lot of extra work and paperwork for the agent that most of them are not going to want to deal with. Plus, asserting your rights is a sign to them that you aren't a pushover and aren't going to get trampled on easily. The bullies prefer easier targets, usually.

[testing22321]

Cue all the people that get thrown in jail for 48 hours without being charged at all, or those arrested for resisting arrest… for resisting arrest.

[phoronixrly]

I think assuming that the CBP will adhere to the law is based on a pretty outdated mindset. I'd say at least since the current management, but more likely since 9/11...

[thankyoufriend]

I'd even call it a delusional mindset. For context, CBP and ICE were both formed in 2003. Jenn Budd has several books on this topic if you want to understand why a growing number of people want to abolish CBP, ICE, and even the entire DHS, which itself was formed only a year prior in 2002. These are very recent organizations in our nation's history, and if we're fine putting things like the Dpt of Education on the chopping block, why not DHS?

[asveikau]

I personally remember that people were calling the DHS a mistake since 2002. I also, as a DC native, was utterly shocked when I first heard "normies" taking DHS seriously as an entity. A friend mentioned DHS was hiring, and I thought to myself ... "wait, but isn't that place bullshit?" Among a certain set of people, it had a bad reputation from day one.