WSJ Reporter: Homeland Security Tried to Take My Phones at the Border

MotherBoard ^ | July 21, 2016 | by JOSEPH COX

[Swordmaker]

On Thursday, a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reporter claimed that the Department of Homeland Security demanded access to her mobile phones when she was crossing the border at the Los Angeles airport.

The case highlights the powers that border agents purport to have, and how vulnerable sensitive information can be when taken through airports in particular.

“I wanted to share a troubling experience I had with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in the hopes it may help you protect your private information,” Maria Abi-Habib, a WSJ journalist focused on ISIS and Al Qaeda wrote in a post on Facebook. (Abi-Habib confirmed to Motherboard that the Facebook account was hers, but declined to comment further.)

Abi-Habib says she had arrived in town for a wedding, when an immigration officer approached her, and took her aside from the main queue. This by itself was not unusual, Abi-Habib writes: because of her job, she has reportedly been put on a list that allows her to bypass the usual questioning someone with her travel profile may encounter.

But things changed quickly, and Abi-Habib was escorted to another part of the airport.

“Another customs agent joined her at that point and they grilled me for an hour—asking me about the years I lived in the US, when I moved to Beirut and why, who lives at my in-laws' house in LA and numbers for the groom and bride whose wedding I was attending. I answered jovially, because I've had enough high-level security experiences to know that being annoyed or hostile will work against you,” she writes.

"I assume they avoided seizing my phones forcefully because they knew we would make a stink about it and have a big name behind us."

The first DHS agent then asked Abi-Habib for her two cell phones, in order “to collect information,” Abi-Habib reports the officer as saying.

“And that is where I drew the line,” Abi-Habib writes. “I told her I had First Amendment rights as a journalist she couldn't violate and I was protected under. I explained I had to protect my government and military sources—over the last month, I have broken two stories that deeply irked the US government, in addition to other stories before I went on maternity leave, including one in Kabul that sparked a Congressional investigation into US military corruption, all stories leaked by American officials speaking to me in confidence.”

The agent passed over a document, which Abi-Habib later photographed and posted to Facebook, purportedly showing that the agent has the right to seize those devices. Abi-Habib instead said that the border agents would need to contact WSJ's lawyers. After some back and forth, the agent went to see her supervisor, and eventually said Abi-Habib is free to go.

Abi-Habib said she reported the incident to a WSJ lawyer, encryption expert and the outlet’s in-house security. From those conversations, Abi-Habib says, “My rights as a journalist or US citizen do not apply at the border, as explained above, since legislation was quietly passed in 2013 giving DHS very broad powers (I researched this since the incident). This legislation also circumvents the Fourth Amendment that protects Americans' privacy and prevents searches and seizures without a proper warrant.”

Back in 2013, WIRED reported on those changes, writing “The Department of Homeland Security’s civil rights watchdog has concluded that travelers along the nation’s borders may have their electronics seized and the contents of those devices examined for any reason whatsoever—all in the name of national security.”

Abi-Habib continues, “Why I was eventually spared, we do not know and we are writing a letter contesting DHS' treatment of me. I assume they avoided seizing my phones forcefully because they knew we would make a stink about it and have a big name behind us.”

Abi-Habib closes with a series of security tips for those with sensitive information crossing the border, such as encrypting devices, but bearing in mind that information can be demanded from you.

“Travel "naked" as one encryption expert told me. If any government wants your information, they will get it no matter what,” she adds.

The DHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Wall Street Journal sent a statement from Editor in Chief Gerard Baker:

"We are disturbed by the serious incident involving WSJ reporter Maria Abi-Habib, a citizen of the United States and Lebanon."

"We have been working to learn more about these events, but the notion that Customs and Border Protection agents would stop and question one of our journalists in connection with her reporting and seek to search her cell phones is unacceptable."

The document scanned by Abi-Habib:

Topics: homeland security, maria abi-habib, DHS, border control, LAX, wall street journal

Contact the author by email or Twitter.

[NEMDF]

Yeah, she should have come in through AZ in the dark of night, and no one would have bothered her.

[fuzzylogic]

(As I’m sure you know...) The Federal ports are still on US soil and the employees are still Federal Gov employees. Our constitutional rights define our rights as citizens, which do not require permission. The Federal Gov doesn’t get to say, “ah yes, but we decided that when we put up a building and call it a ‘Federal Port’ we no longer have to honor your rights”.

The only reason I consent to my baggage being searched when flying is due to the safety of everyone else WHILE TRAVELING. I’m given the choice of not flying if I don’t want to be searched. But once I’ve finished my travel and I’m just looking to prove my citizenship to pass through border security I’ve not consented to any of my constitutional rights being violated. I don’t understand this notion that the government can decide “exception zones to the Constitution” that have not been ratified by the people of the USA.

The idea of private documents being subject to “random searches” is an egregious violation of our rights regardless of where in the USA I am, *especially* including Federal buildings. Unless there’s some reasonable suspicion of a crime or immediate danger to others this is BS.

[Tammy8]

This goes further back than Obama, even prior to 9/11 before DHS came about border officials have had the law behind them to do whatever they choose to do. Most of the time they don’t press the envelope but it is there for them and has been for a long time. Before Customs came under Homeland Security they were under Treasury and had extraordinary legal leeway especially at the border even then.

Considering who she is and what she does I imagine the rest of the story is she was likely flagged in the computer for contacts she has that DHS is interested in. Possibly rightfully so. Some supervisor just decided not to press the issue so she was allowed to go her merry way.

If anything Obama being in charge likely is the reason her phones weren’t taken at least for a look through. His idea is no border security.

[Tammy8]

I personally think it is a good thing at the border. This is part of border security and if people have a problem with it they can work around it or not cross the border. I would not agree to the same thing if other than at the border. She was in Los Angeles but came in from another country so LAX was the border entry point for her.

[I want the USA back]

Profiling someone with a muzzard name. I’m cool with that.

[vette6387]

“Hmmm...these rules sound like IRS rules ie ‘We’re doing it because we can.’”

The entire US Gubbimint is like a bunch of male dogs licking their balls BECAUSE THEY CAN! Time for President Trump to re-institure the Constitution and the Bill of Rights!

[monkeyshine]

Its crazy. Americans have rights secured against infringement by the 1st and 4th Amendments. Allowing agents to search computers and devices without a warrant is an open door invitation to corruption, blackmail, and corporate espionage among other risks.

[Shanghai Dan]

Is is the border. If you come in on an international flight, you are still in International-land until you pass through border patrol at Tom Bradley International Terminal (I go through it 6-7 times a year).

You are not legally in the US until you’re on the other side of the CBP officers lining the entrance hall. Yes, the International territory you are in is contained within the US, but it is not US territory.

That’s pretty much true at all International ports worldwide, no matter how far “inland” they may be. If you haven’t passed through border control, you’re still in International territory.

And there are a few places (like Toronto in Canada) where you actually go through US border control at the airport. Yes, you’re at the Toronto Airport, you’re surrounded by Canada - but you just passed through US border control and thus are now in US territory.

[SuperLuminal]

Big mistake!

DHS should have sent her to Gitmo.

[VanShuyten]

“Her name seems to indicate that she is a muckin’ Fuslim, so they were just doing their job.”

Actually, her name indicates she is of Lebanese Christian decent.

[Squantos]

The “travel naked” comment is key ..... I never use the cloud, factory reset my gadgets before travel, emergency points of contact in my phonebook only. Consider using stacked VPN’s, PGP encrypted email, TOR browser, Tails which is a “live” OS. Also a virtual OS such as peppermint from lumbuntu. All this on a encrypted thumb drive like a ironkey.

These are tools that leave no footprint / data history etc on your gadgets or the thumb drive...... Sort of a digital protection suite for road warriors.

Just what I do...

[JimRed]

Actually, her name indicates she is of Lebanese Christian decent.

If that is the case, my bad; mea culpa!

[JimRed]

I never use the cloud, factory reset my gadgets before travel...

Most of us would not have a clue about how to do that. And what's a cloud?

[GOPJ]

One more reason to vote for Trump... get the filth out of Homeland “Security”...

[Squantos]

Cloud is apples storage where almost everything you do is stored away from your device in case of loss or damage so you can get you data back. Never use it.Sort of a external hard drive in apples iCloud .

Factory reset is in the settings menu of most smart phones ..... fast and easy.

[ThunderSleeps]

Android security incentive - ANDROID PING!
Android Ping! If you want on or off the Android Ping List, Freepmail me.

---

My take: I don't have a passcode on my phone, it isn't encrypted. I simply don't keep anything valuable on it. I figure hackers can't break in and steal what simply isn't there. However, this kind of excrement makes me want to put a passcode on my phone and encrypt the living daylights out of everything on there - which is just a few vacation/trip pics and dank memes. But I like the idea of a bunch of fascist hacks wasting time figuring that out.

[kingu]

However, as a US citizen I disagree that Congress has the authority to remove my 4th Amendment rights simply because I’m passing through said port. My rights are inherent in my person and not subject to my geographic location.

Your passport and your rights apply to your person at a border crossing. Everything else, including the underwear you are wearing, is what you are importing, and all imports are subject to inspection or seizure.

This is a common law concept and secure in our borders is the constitutional reference to this common law.

Or to flip your argument around, do you think that packages that are shipped to the United States should be exempt from customs inspection if they are going to a US citizen absent a warrant enabling the inspection? The only difference is your proximity to the property being imported.

[Cboldt]

-- Are there ANY editors who actually review the reports by their journalists? This reads like LA airport is actually on the border of America and Mexico. --

It's a common legal fiction. Pearson airport in Canada has what is effecively (for search purposes) a US border inside an airport that is miles from a geographical border. Once through that, you will not encounter immigration or customs after exiting the plane in the US.

[kingu]

I’m pretty sure the inception of the concept for inspection, taxation and confiscation of property being imported goes back to around the time of the first border being declared, likely laws of a walled city.