|
''United States v. Arnold'', 523 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 2008), is a United States court case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not require government agents to have reasonable suspicion before searching laptops or other digital devices at the border, including international airports.〔''United States v. Arnold'', (533 F. 3d 1003 ) (9th Cir. 2008).〕 This decision has caused worry and some controversy among Fourth Amendment advocates, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Especially troubled are those that legitimately store sensitive business, legal, or customer data; who worry that federal agents might leak information found from laptop searches. Several legislators have discussed and introduced measures to counter the ruling in order to provide more protection to travellers, but none have become law. ==Background to the case== On July 17, 2005, Michael Arnold arrived at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) after spending a three week vacation in the Philippines. After retrieving his luggage, Arnold proceeded through the checkpoint at customs. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Officer Laura Peng saw Arnold waiting in line and selected him for secondary questioning. Peng questioned Arnold, and began inspecting his luggage, noting a laptop computer and several computer accessories. Peng instructed Arnold to turn on the computer so she could see if it was functioning. CBP Officer John Roberts was called to assist with the inspection while the computer was booting up. Among the icons displayed on the computer's desktop, two were named "Kodak Pictures" and one was named "Kodak Memories". Peng and Roberts opened these folders, began viewing the photos, and noted one that depicted two nude women. At that point special agents from U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) were called. Arnold was detained and questioned by the ICE agents for several hours. They further examined the computer and equipment, and found numerous images of what they believed to be child pornography. Arnold was released, but his computer was seized by the agents. Federal agents obtained a warrant two weeks later. Arnold was charged with (1) knowingly transporting child pornography,〔(18 U.S.C. Section 2256(8)(A) ).〕 (2) knowingly possessing a computer hard drive and compact discs which both contained more than one image of child pornography,〔 and (3) knowingly and intentionally traveling in foreign commerce and attempting to engage in illicit sexual conduct with a person under 18 years of age.〔(18 U.S.C. Section 2423(f) ).〕〔(18 U.S.C. Section 2423(c) ) .〕 Arnold filed for a motion to suppress, and argued that the government required reasonable suspicion to conduct the search. This motion was granted by the District Court, ruling in Arnold's favor. The Government promptly appealed the case, and stated that the border doctrine took precedence over the Fourth Amendment's protection from unreasonable search. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the lower court's ruling, holding in favor of the Government. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「United States v. Arnold」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|