Beyond Our Borders Border Searches of Your Electronic Devices Every year, tens of millions of travelers arrive at U.S. borders, where they are subject to a search. Of these travelers, about 12 million undergo a secondary screening, and approximately five thousand of these screenings involve an electronic device. About three hundred devices—laptops, tablets, and smartphones—are sent to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement forensics laboratory in Fairfax, Virginia, for further examination. The U.S. government has historically had broad power to search travelers and their property when they enter this country. That power includes the right to inspect papers and other physical documents in the possession of anyone entering the United States, including U.S. citizens. Increasingly, however, instead of being carried in physical form, thousands of documents are carried on the hard drives of laptop computers, in tablets, or in smartphones. Does the government’s power to conduct border searches give it the right to rummage through all of the data on an electronic device? A Legal Challenge to Extensive Searches of Electronic Devices When Pascal Abidor, a Ph.D. student who has dual U.S. and French citizenship, traveled by train from Canada to New York, U.S. Customs and Border Control agents pulled him aside and required him to log on to his computer. They then examined much of its contents. Abidor was released after a few hours, but the Department of Homeland Security kept his laptop for eleven days. Abidor challenged the search. His complaint alleged that the suspicionless search of U.S. citizens’ electronic devices at international borders violates their constitutional right to privacy. The lawsuit was dismissed when a federal court concluded that Abidor lacked standing to challenge the government’s border search policies. Routine versus Forensic Searches of Electronic Devices In another case, Ali Saboonchi and his wife were stopped at the border on returning from a day trip to the Canadian side of Niagara Falls. Saboonchi was a dual citizen of the United States and Iran. His name had been flagged in the Homeland Security database because of information from the FBI concerning inquiries he had made about specialized technology with possible medical or military applications. Customs officials performed a secondary search of Saboonchi’s vehicle and questioned him and his wife. The officials allowed the couple to reenter the country, but seized two of Saboonchi’s smartphones and a flash drive and sent them to Virginia for further testing. A week later, customs officials returned Saboonchi’s electronics. The government then filed criminal charges against Saboonchi in federal court for violating U.S. export restrictions on trade with Iran. The indictment alleged that he had sold specialized equipment to a company in the United Arab Emirates that was linked to a company in Iran. His digital devices had contained cont ...

1. Beyond Our Borders
Border Searches of Your Electronic Devices
Every year, tens of millions of travelers arrive at U.S. borders,
where they are subject to a search.
Of these travelers, about 12 million undergo a secondary
screening, and approximately five
thousand of these screenings involve an electronic device.
About three hundred
devices—laptops, tablets, and smartphones—are sent to the
Immigration and Customs
Enforcement forensics laboratory in Fairfax, Virginia, for
further examination.
The U.S. government has historically had broad power to search
travelers and their property
when they enter this country. That power includes the right to
inspect papers and other physical
documents in the possession of anyone entering the United
States, including U.S. citizens.
Increasingly, however, instead of being carried in physical
form, thousands of documents are
carried on the hard drives of laptop computers, in tablets, or in

2. smartphones. Does the
government’s power to conduct border searches give it the right
to rummage through all of the
data on an electronic device?
A Legal Challenge to Extensive Searches of Electronic Devices
When Pascal Abidor, a Ph.D. student who has dual U.S. and
French citizenship, traveled by train
from Canada to New York, U.S. Customs and Border Control
agents pulled him aside and
required him to log on to his computer. They then examined
much of its contents. Abidor was
released after a few hours, but the Department of Homeland
Security kept his laptop for eleven
days.
Abidor challenged the search. His complaint alleged that the
suspicionless search of U.S.
citizens’ electronic devices at international borders violates
their constitutional right to privacy.
The lawsuit was dismissed when a federal court concluded that
Abidor lacked standing to
challenge the government’s border search policies.

3. Routine versus Forensic Searches of Electronic Devices
In another case, Ali Saboonchi and his wife were stopped at the
border on returning from a day
trip to the Canadian side of Niagara Falls. Saboonchi was a dual
citizen of the United States and
Iran. His name had been flagged in the Homeland Security
database because of information from
the FBI concerning inquiries he had made about specialized
technology with possible medical or
military applications. Customs officials performed a secondary
search of Saboonchi’s vehicle
and questioned him and his wife. The officials allowed the
couple to reenter the country, but
seized two of Saboonchi’s smartphones and a flash drive and
sent them to Virginia for further
testing.
A week later, customs officials returned Saboonchi’s
electronics. The government then filed
criminal charges against Saboonchi in federal court for
violating U.S. export restrictions on trade
with Iran. The indictment alleged that he had sold specialized
equipment to a company in the
United Arab Emirates that was linked to a company in Iran. His
digital devices had contained

4. contact information about the companies involved, along with
other evidence.
Saboonchi argued that the evidence had been illegally seized
and that the information obtained
from his electronic devices should be excluded from trial. The
court recognized a difference
between routine border searches and forensic border searches,
which involve experts using
specialized software. Forensic searches, according to the court,
require reasonable suspicion.
Nevertheless, the court concluded that the government had
reasonable suspicion that Saboonchi
was involved in violations of export restrictions.
Critical Thinking
● What are some steps that businesspersons can take to avoid
issues at the border with
respect to the contents of their electronic devices?