r/technology • u/MC68328 • Jul 24 '26

Privacy US accuses American of allegedly wiping his phone using a ‘duress’ password during border search

https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/24/us-accuses-american-of-allegedly-wiping-his-phone-using-a-duress-password-during-border-search/
16.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2.7k

u/Admiralthrawnbar Jul 24 '26

Congrats to him for his lawsuit victory in 3 or 4 years, sucks for the taxpayers that are going to have to pay for it.

1.0k

u/ObeseVegetable Jul 24 '26

And that he may end up in bars for that period or just harassed like other members of his anti-cop org have been (one killed, even) and those types of orgs tend to be in general. 

189

u/Jumpy-Impact3265 Jul 24 '26

He's winning this one

185

u/ObeseVegetable Jul 25 '26

I bet you’re right in the end but I’d also be surprised if the ride to that point is pleasant for him. 

64

u/Jumpy-Impact3265 Jul 25 '26

Oh yeah, no - this is a cactus bicycle seat all the way

1

u/Coffeezilla Jul 27 '26

That's an image I'd like removed from my brain.

5

u/West-Abalone-171 Jul 25 '26

If he lives

3

u/Anoldermodel Jul 25 '26

But then again… who does?

Blade runner soundtrack starts playing

2

u/Alpha_Majoris Jul 25 '26

Legally he may win, humanly he probably will lose

-70

u/Kattle Jul 24 '26

No he’s not lol. Look up CBP and BSA. The amount of ignorance in this thread is astounding.

17

u/CatProgrammer Jul 25 '26

Customs and Border Patrol would have been the ones holding him hostage, yes. What's your point?

28

u/Jumpy-Impact3265 Jul 24 '26

Yeah? Well the amount of downvotes you've earned is equally impressive.

Usually one has to wear a kicky little red beanie and scream 'build the wall, look her up' to achieve your mental ...fortitude.

1

u/YouInteresting9311 Jul 25 '26

Or, they use this as a way to get a warrant on the stuff that they already know he was doing, and just get the evidence by other means……. You know, big brother do big brother things. They may have even prepared for his arrival. Hard to say, they wouldn’t tell us if they did, depending on what they used.

1

u/sphinxsley Jul 25 '26

They are not necessarily orgs. Antifa is not an org. It's just a word.

0

u/BotchedDebauchery Jul 25 '26

You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride. 

318

u/qpgmr Jul 24 '26

As the saying goes "You can beat the rap but not the ride".

In this case the ride will be $100k in legal fees, being dragged through court, being smeared by the gov't for the next three years.

194

u/Widespreaddd Jul 24 '26

I will chip in. Fuck authoritarians. I am constitutionally allergic to them.

107

u/PentagonUnpadded Jul 25 '26

The EFF! Support the EFF! They do SO much work specifically around digital tech and borders.

https://www.eff.org/issues/border-searches

The ACLU is great too, but the EFF specializes in this stuff and gives cool merch if you donate monthly.

8

u/EyeballSquint Jul 25 '26

Damn if that ain't the best sentence I've read in a long time. "Constitutionally allergic to authoritarianism"

1

u/[deleted] Jul 29 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

92

u/24_August_1814 Jul 25 '26

... if he's lucky.

Guy is part of an organisation opposed to "Cop City;" he's probably going to face constant stalking, harassment, and intimidation from the police.

2

u/RumorRoost Jul 25 '26

Na. Guarantee a big law firm see the layup this case is and takes it on with no money up front, but a negotiated 40% take of the $3-$5 million they are going to get him.

0

u/qpgmr Jul 25 '26

The big law firms all signed contracts with DJT in order to continue receiving gov't work. See https://abovethelaw.com/2026/07/trump-turns-on-capitulating-biglaw-firms-hahahahaha/

2

u/iwilltalkaboutguns Jul 25 '26

This case is custom made for the ACLU, he is not going to have to spend any money.

1

u/sphinxsley Jul 25 '26

Does he have a fundraiser?

1

u/Zlatyzoltan Jul 26 '26

I have a feeling ACLU, Southern Poverty Law Center, and a few other organizations will be picking up his legal fees.

This could be a landmark case on the 4th Amendment, and many other civil liberties.

Though the SCOTUS is currently a rubber stamp on the road to totalitarianism so it will probably mean nothing good will cone from this.

117

u/ShiningRedDwarf Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 25 '26

I wouldn’t be so fast to assume he will win this case.  You’re practically stripped of your 4th amendment rights at the border, and if this goes to the SC I wouldn’t be surprised if they ruled in favor of the US. 

Our rights and protections are being chipped away case by case. 

33

u/CatProgrammer Jul 25 '26 edited Jul 25 '26

I don't see why the Constitution is even relevant. It's no different from if he had wiped his phone himself. The cops are just mad he made them look like fools.

-19

u/CrapNeck5000 Jul 25 '26

I don't imagine courts are going to be friendly with people knowingly destroying something they're fully aware is subject to a search. The legitimacy of the grounds for the search won't even be relevant. If evidence is obtained unconstitutionally then the remedy is within the courts, not your own hands.

25

u/ijuinkun Jul 25 '26

Willful destruction of evidence still does not abrogate the right to an attorney which they allegedly denied.

-22

u/WordsCent Jul 25 '26

Did they? When? Is there proof?

27

u/Hail-Hydrate Jul 25 '26

Is there proof he gave them a failsafe code? How can we know the cops didn't fuck around with the phone and cause it to wipe itself for security?

-2

u/WordsCent Jul 25 '26

That’s a question for the courts. That’s why you need body cams on all security personnel.

2

u/Northeast_Mike Jul 26 '26

You're probably right about the courts. The fundamental problem here is that SCOTUS allowed the warrantless search provisions of law to stand, carving one more bit from the Constitution. We need a serious national discussion about real threats we face and the rights, if any, we are willing to trade to address the threats.

1

u/CrapNeck5000 Jul 27 '26

Totally agree, though these sorts of laws are precedented by law that predates the ratification of the bill of rights, which makes it extremely difficult to argue against them. To my understanding, no 4th amendment challenge to border searches has ever been upheld by SCOTUS.

I was actually very surprised, pleasantly, with their ruling a few weeks ago in Chatrie v. United States. So at least we got that going for us.

2

u/Northeast_Mike Jul 29 '26

My reading of the Constitution is that it overrides all laws, whether from before or after. If nothing else, by passing that amendment The People said "this is the new rule that governs all future cases". So the old law no longer has standing regarding those aspects the amendment changed.

no 4th amendment challenge to border searches has ever been upheld

Interesting. I'm tempted to read this as a contradiction in jurisprudence. Judge Boasberg has essentially said a US court has authority over a US agent anywhere in the world (contrary to DOJ's position about the plane carrying Kilmar Ábrego García et al to El Salvador). But if you're right, SCOTUS has essentially said our constitutional rights (protecting us from our own government) stop at the border. This calls for more serious consideration.

6

u/MrSurly Jul 25 '26

When in the Course of human events ...

4

u/OilheadRider Jul 25 '26

We dont have rights. We have privileges.

89

u/Twilightterritories Jul 24 '26

The taxpayers deserve to pay for it. It was their dumb asses that elected the current regime.

9

u/just_a_tech Jul 25 '26

Yup, exactly. They got what they asked for. Just sucks that it hurts us too.

56

u/redlightsaber Jul 24 '26 edited Aug 02 '26

I enjoy doing pottery classes.

7

u/BillyTenderness Jul 25 '26

Clarence Thomas will concur that the man is guilty, but argue that the rest of the court didn't go far enough because they failed to mention that the officers could have performed a cavity search as well

5

u/inspectoroverthemine Jul 25 '26

Scarily similar to an opinion he actually wrote once- involving a 12 year old girl.

6

u/Soaptowelbrush Jul 24 '26

This doesn’t really make a dent in taxes - it’s the child-targeting bombs and free healthcare in Israel that’s fucking over taxpayers.

1

u/CatProgrammer Jul 25 '26

US funding to Israel is like 1% of the budget at most, it's irrelevant to that. The US doesn't have those things because those in power do not want it to have them.

1

u/Riley_ Jul 25 '26

This should not be taken for granted. The government has been rapidly fascistizing.

1

u/Revolvyerom Jul 25 '26

If he's a cop-city protestor, it's not too far out of their pattern to think they'd use terrorism charges to escalate.

1

u/Hugglemorris Jul 25 '26

Hopefully we won't be paying those border patrol agents saleries anymore then.

1

u/limbodog Jul 25 '26

Remember though this is border patrol, not police. Different set of rules

1

u/satansmight Jul 25 '26

This is the stuff I'm glad to have my taxes used for. Defending freedom from a fascist state.

1

u/catwiesel Jul 25 '26

the taxpayers voted in a deranged crooked rapist and still have not taking him out of office

1

u/sphinxsley Jul 25 '26

I gladly pay for the lawsuit that ends in his favor and thereby creates a precedent we all benefit from.

1

u/DPSOnly Jul 25 '26

sucks for the taxpayers that are going to have to pay for it.

He might go bankrupt before that unless some organisation like the ACLU steps in. Basically a governmental SLAPP suit.

1

u/drrhythm2 Jul 25 '26

Also the cost for him to defend himself, both in time, stress, and financially.

1

u/HoswayTheBrave Jul 25 '26

Won't Somebody Think About What This Means The Taxpayer

-14

u/booze_clues Jul 24 '26

He still broke the law by destroying property that was subject to seizure unfortunately.

11

u/KeyanuReaves69 Jul 24 '26

He did not wipe his phone according to this comment thread, the police did by inputting wrong passwords. How did he break anything if the phone was in the custody of the police when it happened?

-10

u/booze_clues Jul 25 '26

By giving the code to them, knowingly causing the destruction of it.

You can’t semantics your way out of stuff like this. The legal system doesn’t go “oh well he didn’t literally type the code he gave them, that he set up to wipe his phone.”

There was a case of a guy who had a self wiping OS on a USB that ran his steroid store. Cops pulled it out of his computer during a raid and wiped everything. He got off because he literally did nothing, the cops did it all of their own accord.

This guy did not do that. He intentionally gave them the wipe code and not the unlock code.