Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Obama to Continue Bush Policy of Searching Travelers' Personal Effects Without Cause

Posted by Joshua Holland, AlterNet at 8:44 AM on August 28, 2009.


But fear not -- more oversight!

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

WaPo:

The Obama administration will largely preserve Bush-era procedures allowing the government to search -- without suspicion of wrongdoing -- the contents of a traveler's laptop computer, cellphone or other electronic device, although officials said new policies would expand oversight of such inspections.

The policy, disclosed Thursday in a pair of Department of Homeland Security directives, describes more fully than did the Bush administration the procedures by which travelers' laptops, iPods, cameras and other digital devices can be searched and seized when they cross a U.S. border. And it sets time limits for completing searches.

But representatives of civil liberties and travelers groups say they see little substantive difference between the Bush-era policy, which prompted controversy, and this one.

"It's a disappointing ratification of the suspicionless search policy put in place by the Bush administration," said Catherine Crump, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union. "It provides a lot of procedural safeguards, but it doesn't deal with the fundamental problem, which is that under the policy, government officials are free to search people's laptops and cellphones for any reason whatsoever."

Doesn't Catherine Crump, staff attorney for the ACLU, know that there are dangerous terrorists out there who hate us for our freedoms?

Digg!

Tagged as: bush, obama, due process, civil liberties, travelers

Joshua Holland is an editor and senior writer at AlterNet.


After Conceding, Then Unconceding, Then Conceding, Then Unconceding, NY Conservative Concedes
Doug Hoffman today issued a statement in which he admitted Bill Owens won the NY-23 special election.
Post by Amanda Terkel. November 24, 2009.
China on Reducing Its Carbon Footprint: Why Should We Have to?
They've got a point. Per capita, China only produces 20 percent of America's carbon emissions.
Post by Robert Dreyfuss. November 24, 2009.
Supremes to Decide if Idle Rich's Scenic Ocean Views More Important than Public Beaches, the Environment
A popular coastal reclamation program is being threatened by short-sighted scumbags.
Post by Joshua Holland. November 24, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Thank you Josh and it does suck.
Posted by: maxpayne on Aug 28, 2009 8:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Change" I can believe in? Whatever.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Plus ca change,
Posted by: oregoncharles on Aug 28, 2009 8:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the more it's the same thing.

Told ya so.

But thanks for the ammunition, Joshua.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But, but
Posted by: Joshua Holland on Aug 28, 2009 8:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
more oversight!!

I'm reassured. You guys, not so much, hunh?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yeah Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: 2nd thoughts: Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: 2nd thoughts: Posted by: Joshua Holland
Freedoms? Or business secrets?
Posted by: Sister_Lauren on Aug 28, 2009 9:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't understand how this is constitutional. Aren't we supposed to be secure from search and seizure in our personal effects?

Is this why they passed legislation in the first place that we needed passports to go to Canada and Mexico? As an excuse to search people's private possessions? I know the drug war has also been used as an excuse for that.

Increased 'sharing' is also scary when it seems the whole government is taken over by drug lords. Who could possibly be untouchable?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Wait a second there Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Wait a second there Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Wait a second there Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Wait a second there Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Wait a second there Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Freedoms? Or business secrets? Posted by: oregoncharles
I'll make sure
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Aug 28, 2009 12:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to pack a pair of handcuffs and a cat-o-nine into my bag every time I fly from now on.

#@!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Unconstitutional!
Posted by: luzmejor on Aug 29, 2009 8:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Because a search of one's personal effects is actually an attempt to make us prove we are innocent of any crimes.

In other words, it is an indication of belief that anyone who travels is likely to be concealing evidence of a crime or an intended crime.

It's a great way to cut down on air traffic, though, isn't it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

William
Posted by: wwahid on Aug 29, 2009 8:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Josh:

I don't get it. And what freedoms of america are people trying to destroy. I can imagine it maybe stopping the freedom of america to use it's military and political might to rob, pillage, and destroy the economies, livelihood, cultures, and resources of other people. I ask you the question, what would you do if you awaken one morning and saw a tank at your door and someone read you the edict of the Pope from 1400 that said the lands and property of any who do not bow down to the king can be killed.

And what about our fear of losing our freedoms of the bill of rights. ben franklin once said something to the effect that if a person does not deserve security if they accept tactics to limit their freedom. I think the most profound thing that america can do now is repent for past sins, commit no more, and live with less so that other people can live.

and for the record let me state that i am a descendant of an enslaved african and a native american.

william

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Animal Farm...
Posted by: frank69 on Aug 29, 2009 9:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everbody is equal except for the Pigs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

a branch of gov acting like a
Posted by: dadanbetty on Aug 30, 2009 3:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
tool

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]