622
GrapheneOS duress PIN could land a man in prison (www.androidauthority.com)
submitted 4 weeks ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
273 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 4 weeks ago (4 children)

as far as I understand, they were not there to serve a warrant. he was crossing a border and the feds are claiming that the 4th amendment doesn't apply because he hadn't yet crossed into America.

border patrol was essentially using a loophole to preemptively collect potential evidence (they'll figure out what to charge him with after they see his phone contents). he's a political activist against a cop city, they were obviously trying to do him dirty.

they were not serving a search warrant. they were abusing what should be an illegal search at the border in order to silence those who speak out against govt overreach.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

    If he wasnt in the US how can the US claim he violated a US law?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    The US claims jurisdiction over its citizens wherever they are.

    Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, because it means you can be prosecuted in the US for stuff like going to Thailand and sexually abusing children there.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 4 weeks ago

    So the law applies, but protection under the law does not.

    Isn't all law essentially derived from powers granted by the constitution?

    If the powers granted by it to enforce a law are applicable when not within the US then then it very reasonably ought to apply to any and all amendments.

    But, reason is on the extinction list with the magafascists. (And all LEO)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    In addition, the law that he's charged with relates to knowingly destroying property that the police have a warrant to sieze.

    There is no precedent of it being applied to border searches where they may not even have reasonable suspicion of a crime and can stop people for questioning on a whim.

    The State has absolutely no claim over your personal property at that point and destroying property that the police hope and dream of siezing isn't the same as destroying property where they've demonstrated probable cause to a judge.

    This argument from the border patrol that you can be arrested for destroying data that is in your possession without ever been given due process and 4th amendment protections isn't supported by precedence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    These fucking conservatives crawl out of the woodwork like cockroaches anytime the government does something heinous and use their piss poor understanding of EVERYTHING to try to justify the heinous actions. It happens every time, and I wish just once to see one of them use real and relevant facts, just so I can pretend that these people live in reality for just one second.

    Hasn't happened yet though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •