this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2026
299 points (99.3% liked)
Privacy
4891 readers
477 users here now
Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Which would still be unreasonable search and seizure.
They were not in the United States and the constitution doesn’t apply at border searches. Their argument is going to be limited to very few things, like “I didn’t destroy anything, the cbp officer did”
He was in fact in the US when this happened. Also he alleges he wasn’t read his Miranda rights, and there’s a good case for presumption of guilt from the “officers.” Also denied him having a lawyer present before engaging.
Thus the officer has no rights to confiscate. There, done.
If they were not in the United States so that the constitution doesn't apply, why would the other US laws apply? Makes no sense.
"You see these guns? That's how" - the fascist bootheels at the border