upvote
I think you legally are in the US while at an American border crossing - at least if the crossing is on US land, which it was in this case. It might be more complicated for preclearance spots. It's just that normal rights are suspended there despite being in the US, even for citizens. Make of that what you will.
reply
Your rights are not suspended, but border agents don’t need a reason to investigate you
reply
...and then they start violating all your rights after starting the investigation lol. its just wordplay.
reply
The Constitution makes no exemption for a suspension of rights at the border.
reply
The Supreme court disagrees with you.
reply
The supreme court is made of fallible humans
reply
The Supreme Court often disagrees with itself.
reply
The alleged crime is knowingly interfering with a lawful search (by providing a duress password that deleted the phone). Location has nothing to do with it.
reply
The location is the crux of the "lawful" part of the search.
reply
That is a most interesting and underrated point.
reply
It's a fairly shallow point that ignores how laws work.

The premise that the law doesn't apply because you're not in the country is false. The constitution applies generally everywhere to all Americans, it's just that what's regarded as reasonable differs during a border search. IANAL, so just my lay opinion on this. Just to validate this, it's only because the constitution exists that the border authorities have any legal basis in doing inspections.

reply
Huh, that is inconsistent. The problem with your comment is noted right here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49390318
reply
Not really - the government have stated that he's in the US. It's the first sentence of the indictment. [1]

> On or about January 24, 2025, in the Northern District of Georgia...

[1]: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.35...

But in general, the thing to note here is that the 4th amendment is always applicable and in force. It's how it's interpreted that changes depending on the circumstance.

reply
It doesn’t matter where he was when he deleted the data. He could be in China, it’s still a crime in the us to destroy evidence wanted by American authorities.
reply
deleted
reply
You're speaking nonsense since there was no charge or warrant against him. People are free to use their phone for f sake.
reply
Law enforcement doesn’t need a warrant to search phones at the border. I agree this is a terrible rule but it is the rule right now.
reply
You have lost track of the chain of discussion.
reply
Is that the 100 mile wide border?
reply
right, there's a contradiction here:

- if you're deemed to be on US soil, constitutional protections (4A) apply; can't be destroying "evidence" unless you're accused of a crime or found to have committed a crime

- if you're deemed _not_ yet on US soil, then how can you be charged with a crime under _US_ law?

reply
The US views that US law applies worldwide. There is no requirement that you be anywhere near the US to be under US jurisdiction for an alleged offense against the US, according to the US.

Also, that constitutional protections are suspended within 100 miles of a land, sea, or air border.

reply
Not sure why you're getting downvoted, since your statement is true:

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/RS22497

Although obviously not all US laws apply and enforcement is a whole other kettle of fish.

reply
4A still doesn't permit you to destroy the evidence. Resist on 4A grounds, destroy the evidence, 4A reasons get overturned - you've got yourself a conviction. US v. Akram Musleh.
reply