Second Circuit Allows Government to Search Electronic Devices at the Border
Recorded: Sept. 18, 2026, 3:08 p.m.
| Original | Summarized |
Second Circuit Allows Government to Search Electronic Devices at the Border Without Any Suspicion | Knight First Amendment Institute
Issues Free Speech & Social Media Public Education Events
About The Knight Institute
Press Statement United States v. Alisigwe NEW YORK—The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit today held that border agents may search travelers’ electronic devices without suspicion. The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) submitted an amicus brief in the case, arguing that the court should require the government to obtain a warrant before searching electronic devices at the border, given the implications of those searches for the First Amendment freedoms of speech, association, and the press, and the Fourth Amendment right to privacy. Filed Under Press Statement Tags Borders
Sign up for news about First Amendment events, research, and litigation Issues Free Speech & Social Media
Featured An alternative to the vision of AI as a potential superintelligence
Privacy & Surveillance
Featured
Transparency & Democracy
Featured
Events Lee C. Bollinger Forum at Columbia University and Online Sign up for news about First Amendment events, research, and litigation Issues Free Speech & Social Media Litigation Public Education Events About
© 2021 Knight First Amendment Institute. Design by Point Five. Development by Tierra Innovation. Icons by Leandro Castelao. |
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently ruled that border agents are permitted to search travelers' electronic devices without any prior suspicion. This decision has drawn significant criticism from advocacy groups, such as the Knight First Amendment Institute and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP), who contended that the ruling jeopardizes fundamental rights guaranteed by the First Amendment freedoms of speech, association, and the press, as well as the Fourth Amendment right to privacy. The case, United States v. Alisigwe, revolved around the government’s reliance on evidence obtained from warrantless searches of a defendant's cell phone at the border. Advocates argued that the implications of these border searches on personal privacy and constitutional freedoms necessitate a warrant requirement before such searches are conducted. They posited that electronic devices contain highly sensitive information, including private thoughts, personal associations, photographs of family and friends, and detailed logs of movement, which should be protected by warrant protection under the First and Fourth Amendments. The amicus brief submitted to the court advanced these arguments, contending that the exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement for border searches does not extend to the searching of electronic devices. The advocates urged the court to affirm that the First and Fourth Amendments mandate that the government must obtain a warrant before searching a cellphone at the border. These arguments were further supported by reference to documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act litigation and the documented burdens placed upon journalists whose devices may contain sensitive newsgathering information, such as names of confidential sources. Despite these arguments highlighting the constitutional implications of the government's actions, the Second Circuit ultimately rejected the pleas for a warrant requirement in their ruling. |