356
‘The Government Hopes To Set a Precedent’: An Interview With the Man Charged for Allegedly Wiping His GrapheneOS Phone (www.404media.co)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/news@lemmy.world
44 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

https://web.archive.org/web/20260728173639/https://www.404media.co/the-government-hopes-to-set-a-precedent-an-interview-with-the-man-charged-for-allegedly-wiping-his-grapheneos-phone/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 25 points 1 month ago (3 children)

So, let's see if I understand this.

Border control agents are allowed to search his phone without a warrant because he technically wasn't in the US, even though he was in Atlanta, because technically that part of the airport counts as not being inside the US.

But, the border control agents are allowed to search his phone in a part of the world that isn't in the US because...? Are border control agents allowed to search his phone in France or Australia? Or is it only in these special pocket dimensions that occur in airports that are in the US but not in the US?

When they demanded that he unlock the phone, he wasn't read his rights, and they refused his requests for a lawyer, presumably because he didn't have those rights because he wasn't technically in the US at the time.

So, he gave them the "duress code" for Graphene OS which deleted the phone's contents.

Now he's being charged under a federal law for knowingly damaging or destroying property to prevent it from being seized.

Is this a law that applies outside the US? Because, we've established that what happened wasn't in the US, which is how they were allowed to search his phone without a warrant, not tell him his rights, and refuse his request for a lawyer.

I know if fundamentally comes down to "might makes right", but borders are an especially egregious case of a location where your rights don't matter.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago*

    De facto it is common practice for the US courts to apply US laws to people who are not US citizens and have never been to US soil for things they did abroad. Either to no one in particular or to non US citizens. The empire knows no bounds and understands their own law as universal.

    De jure it is going to be a dry, expensive, and long winded debate that will ruin this man's life thus achieving the political goal.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    Whatever you want to categorize “not US” as is not really the point. They have long claimed this authority “on entry”. There’s no authority in France or Australia or a pocket dimension but “on entry”. Actually I suppose the pocket dimension is important because that is what defines the border that otherwise appears to be wholly in the us

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    The pocket dimension matters because if it were just "on entry" you could say "ok, in that case, I won't enter". But, once you're in this special place, the 4th amendment doesn't apply, so they can search all your stuff. Yet, at the same time, apparently if you do certain things, you're breaking laws that should only apply to people who are within the USA.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    I completely disagree. When you’re in the pocket dimension you’re completely safe. The problem is the pocket dimension exists only to move the border to arbitrary locations.

    For example in this case we’re talking about Atlanta which is 200 miles inland. Any casual look at the border tells you they are already in the us. Yet the pocket dimension moves the border so you’re “entering” the us and your civil rights can be violated

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    How are you completely safe? While you're in that pocket dimension they're allowed to do anything they want to you, and you don't receive the normal protections that you would otherwise get from the constitution if you were in the USA. The pocket dimension seems like the most dangerous place to be.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Ok, that was a practical answer. Practically speaking, they will almost always do this at the border. The pocket dimension is used to move the border anywhere. I suppose you’re right that it’s outside the bounds of normal rights and process but the reality is still that the border is where this happens and they don’t have motivation to change that.

    Obviously you’re under constant surveillance and there are exceptions when something triggers an alert

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent