You your phone and Uncle Sam

This article on CBC Canada, five days ago.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/us-canada-device-searches-1.7619944

Thanks, Phred and SJ, for posting these articles. Sobering information to be aware of.

Thanks.

Most people I know aren't travelling to the US these days, but my daughter has to go for a conference next month. And we are Indigenous people with status cards, which seems to trigger issues, according to one of those articles.

A lot of workplaces here are advising people to use burner phones if they travel for work to the US.

When I travelled this summer in Europe, for the 1st time in my life, I scanned and saved every ID document I have, including my birth certificate, and every expired passport. I saved them in multiple locations, including my phone. I made photocopies and stuck them in my bag. Returning from Dublin, I went through CBC there. No questions asked, but I had worked out various scenarios in my head. Paranoia, perhaps. But then I don't look like, sound like, and have a name that doesn't 'match' 60.5% of the population of the USA.

Since my passport has my place of birth, which is not USA, my concern is not zero. I'm going to put a photo of my naturalization papers on my phone, and I am appalled that I even have to think this way.

Let's just keep things in perspective.

US courts have long recognized 4th Amendment exceptions at the border and confirmed in 1990 United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez that protections do not apply to searches and seizures by US agents of property owned by a nonresident alien. Ehem... laws differ but its much the same when I enter the UK.

It's a whole other set of rules for US citizens & residents.

CBP processes 868,000 passengers and pedestrians at land and air ports daily, of that number 263,000 are international air passengers. Approximately 75 million tourists entered the US in 2024.

Searches of mobile devices have consistently increased across multiple administrations over the last 10+ years. In 2018 it was 33.3K, 2024 was 47K.

Fiscal year 2025 has seen Q1 12,092 device searches; Q2 12,260 device searches; Q3 14,899 device searches. So far in three quarters of FY 2025 a total of 39,250, and if Q4 tracks the same, or let's say it hits 15K, we're looking at approximately 54K devise searches for FY 2025. Not an unreasonable or out of the ordinary increase.

That's potentially 54,000 +/- device searches in the FY with 868,000 daily CBP processes (300million yearly of which 75million are tourists). At 75,000,000 tourists and 54,000 searches that's .072%.

Now CBP publishes their data. Many countries do not. The UK does not, but privacy rights advocacy groups pegs UK Border Force device searches at 60,000+ while 144million people entered the UK in 2019.

https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2018-Jan/CBP-Directive-3340-049A-Border-Search-of-Electronic-Media-Compliant.pdf

It's not the increases in numbers of searches that are the worrisome part. It's what they're looking for now. Comparisons to the UK or other western countries don't really stand up. It's a different type of government in the US.

I agree with Gerry M. It's not the size, or number. It's what you do with it. And what concerns many potential international visitors is the very broad interpretation that some CBP officers have anecdotally used to either deny entry or detain and disappear innocent visitors. There is a reason why the US is the only first world country to have had a decrease in international tourism this year.

I found this statement from the second link curious.

While electronic device searches jumped by 12.6 per cent over the past year, the total number of travellers entering the United States rose by 6.6 per cent

I thought the number of travellers was down this year.

A downturn in international travel to the U.S. may last beyond summer,
experts warn A decline in foreign visitors traveling to the United
States has stretched well into the summer ByRIO YAMAT Associated Press
September 1, 2025, 5:16 A

M

The World Travel & Tourism Council projected ahead of Memorial Day
that the U.S. would be the only country among the 184 it studied where
foreign visitor spending would fall in 2025. The finding was “a clear
indicator that the global appeal of the U.S. is slipping,” the global
industry association said.

“The world’s biggest travel and tourism economy is heading in the
wrong direction,” Julia Simpson, the council’s president and CEO,
said. "While other nations are rolling out the welcome mat, the U.S.
government is putting up the ‘closed’ sign.”

Travel research firm Tourism Economics, meanwhile, predicted this
month that the U.S. would see 8.2% fewer international arrivals in
2025, an improvement from its earlier forecast of a 9.4% decline but
well below the numbers of foreign visitors to the country before the
COVID-19 pandemic.

EDITED.

CanAmCherie, I guess that could include US travelers returning because i think US travelers out of the US are up. Just a guess.

I am staying out of the politics as i think it's inappropriate for the forum. But here are the numbers and the sources of the numbers and a description of the mission and even a suggestion on how to guard your privacy if the facts dont provide you comfort when entering the US.

So the net is about s 6% increase on the percent of travelers having their phones checked. The 2024 statistic was fewer than 0.01% of travelers had their phones checked, so maybe the word "fewer" is less significant now and the statistic should be stated as "about" 0.01%". Or in a worst case if I am reading it all wrong the largest percentage you can reach with the numbers in thr article is "less than" 0.0125% of those entering having their phone or laptop ot similar electronic device searched. You decide how significant 0.0125% is in your manner of thought.

The search numbers, but not the entrance numbers and all the details of what they can do and how they do it, are here: https://www.cbp.gov/travel/cbp-search-authority/border-search-electronic-devices.

Why? I point this out because you might want to assume that at least some part of the numbers are as legitimate as they were under the previous administration. Or not. Who knows? The stated reason from the CBP website is:

These searches have been used to identify and combat terrorist
activity, child pornography, drug smuggling, human smuggling, bulk
cash smuggling, human trafficking, export control violations,
intellectual property rights violations and visa fraud, among other
violations.

Seems like a logical and proper mission.

For those considering a burner phone, also know that CBP can't/won't search cloud accounts. You will be requested to close the accounts and put the phone in airplane mode. So, rather than a burner, maybe put everything in the cloud.

The article that S J linked

"This article on CBC Canada, five days ago.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/us-canada-device-searches-1.7619944"

looks like it has a misprint or typo or something. The statistic about increased arrivals looks suspect in the context of the story. (I may be just misreading it though.) The uptick in searches in the most recent quarter is dramatic.

Regardless it is truly disturbing article and should give all Canadians -- I suppose everyone in the world-- some pause.

Happy travels.

as GerryM mentions, it seem like VAP and Mr. E are willfully ignoring the relevant aspect and thereby misrepresenting the increased concern about phone searches. They are couching the increased concern as, perhaps, evidence of anti-gov't bias during the current admin,

while those whose concern has risen are pointing out the actual cause, which is the reverse -- the current admin is using political criteria over and above 'safety' criteria when flagging material found on the phones.

The news seems to be saying that "to identify and combat terrorist
activity, child pornography, drug smuggling, human smuggling, bulk
cash smuggling, human trafficking, export control violations,
intellectual property rights violations and visa fraud, among other
violations." might be the overt claim, but the covert reality is that political positions that contravene the current admin are causing entrance holds or denials. That is a legit reason for concern.

Imagine if the CBP and related agencies in 2011 were flagging int'l travelers entering the USA for having social media accounts with posts against universal healthcare or commenting positively on Op/Eds that advocated lowering tax rates for high earners. Wouldn't that be cause for concern even if these agencies were also aiming "to identify and combat terrorist
activity, child pornography, drug smuggling, human smuggling, bulk
cash smuggling, human trafficking, export control violations,
intellectual property rights violations and visa fraud, among other
violations." ??

As usual on the weekends, this thread will probably be clipped or removed entirely when the webmaster returns to the office. As it should be, according to our agreed - upon conventions. I should have held my tongue myself, since we're not supposed to compound violations with responses.

Back on the 4th amendment and phone searches at borders issue, I think that this isn't so clearly settled law. Keep in mind that when you search using common search engines, you find what it thinks you are looking for. This isn't nefarious, it's just business.

it has been up since Thursday, avirosemail, through several cycles of monitoring and is still here.

I fully expect it to survive

I suspect Andrew and gang are start Monday with a full dose of headache reliever meds and end the day at the local watering hole.

To tie this back to the topic of safety/security and surveillance, it seems to me that free expression and its limits in a diverse setting will always end up biased towards the subsets that favor less justice-is-blind oversight than a kind of paternalistic father-knows-best application of discretion.

But let's be understanding and mild in our appraisal of the setting suns of York -- let's take them at their word that what appears under the mid-day light to be self-dealing and a grab for unearned/inherited power really is more a manifestation of a certain quasi-benevolent wish to see our favorites preserved and unproven novelties resisted. Who gets to decide which old things are the good old things and which novelties should be nipped in the bud? First past the post? Most followers? Best donor development machinery?

If only there were some mechanisms of moderation and sharing of power that could yield outcomes that both bright people and regular-old-Joes could agree were correctly aimed and well-intentioned.

On one of my arrivals back in the USA at the end of an overseas flight, I was struck at how the immigration official at his podium reviewed my passport, asked a couple of questions, and beamed, "Welcome back home to the USA!" as he handed it back to me. He seemed to think that being away from home/USA was some kind of travail. How relieved I must be to have made it through the trip. If you think/feel that things get more dangerous the farther you get from home, then of course you believe in keeping a close eye on outsiders.

I think there's a reasonable distinction between political discussion and discussion of assumptions about safety and security that are very different today from a year ago. The USA is a more dangerous and insecure place today to visitors as a result of policy decisions by the current administration. I don't think there's anything political about that statement.