Groups sue for information on U.S. border search policy

By Julia Cheever

February 8, 2008

Two civil rights groups sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in federal court in San Francisco Thursday in a bid for information on government policy on questioning and searches of travelers entering the United States.

The lawsuit was filed by the San Francisco-based Asian Law Caucus and Electronic Frontier Foundation under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act.

The groups' lawyers said the suit was in response to growing complaints about border agents' allegedly intrusive questioning on travelers' religious and political beliefs and the inspection and copying of private information on computers and cell phones.

Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Marcia Hoffmann said, "The public has the right to know what the government's standards are for border searches. Laptops, phones, and other gadgets include vast amounts of personal information."

Asian Law Caucus attorney Shirin Sinnar said, "The fact that so many people face these searches and questioning every time they return to the United States, not knowing why and unable to clear their names, violates basic notions of fairness and due process."

The lawsuit says the department and its subsidiary, Customs and Border Protection, failed to meet a 20-day deadline for responding to a request for information. It seeks a court order requiring the agencies to provide records on questioning and search policies.

The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken of Oakland.

Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Laura Keehner said she couldn't comment specifically on the lawsuit.

But she said that in general, "Customs and Border Protection is responsible for facilitating legitimate trade and travel while at the same time enforcing hundreds of U.S. laws pertaining to immigration, terrorism and all types of contraband."

Keehner said the agency therefore routinely "processes all persons, baggage and merchandise arriving in the United States." Agents have always been able to inspect written materials for items such as child pornography and it would be unreasonable to exempt computers and other electronic media, Keehner said.

--

Permalink

####