Perspective: Suspicionless border searches Harvard Student’s Deportation Raises Concerns About Border Device Searches and Social Media Surveillance

Media outlets reported this week that an international student at Harvard University was deported back to Lebanon after border agents in Boston searched his electronic devices and confronted him about his friends’ social media posts. Saira Hussain and Sophia Cope write for EFF that these allegations raise serious concerns about whether the government is following its own policies regarding border searches of electronic devices, and the constitutionality of these searches and of social media surveillance by the government.

As the Harvard Crimson reported, Ismail Ajjawi alleges that after he arrived at Logan International Airport, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers subjected him to hours of questioning, including about his religious practices. Officers also had him unlock his cell phone and laptop, and took the devices out of his sight for approximately five hours. A CBP officer ultimately confronted Ajjawi about political posts that his friends had made on social media, cancelled his visa, and denied his admission to the United States.

Apart from whether CBP officers violated their agency’s policy, the search of Ajjawi’s electronic devices is yet one more example of why we continue to argue that warrantless, suspicionless border searches of electronic devices are unconstitutional given the significant intrusion into privacy and free speech.

Hussain and Cope write that the problem of border agents having unfettered access to travelers’ devices is growing. Last year, CBP conducted over 33,000 border searches of electronic devices, up from just over 5,000 searches six years prior. EFF has a pending lawsuit, Alasaad v. Nielsen, that challenges the constitutionality of warrantless, suspicionless border searches of electronic devices.

EFF argues that warrantless, suspicionless border searches of electronic devices violate the Fourth Amendment, given the vast amounts of highly personal information these searches can yield. EFF also argues that these searches violate First Amendment rights, including the right to have your relationships and associations remain private—whether they are reflected in your contact lists, call logs, text messages and emails, or social media.

“As Ajjawi alleges, not only did officers probe into his relationships and associations, but also based his admissibility determination on the posts of his social media contacts, which is particularly attenuated and contrary to freedom of speech,” Hussain and Cope write.