this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2026

361 points (99.7% liked)

News

38549 readers

2159 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

361

Activist charged with felony after giving border agent "duress code" that wiped his phone (arstechnica.com)

submitted 2 days ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

41 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In early 2025, Atlanta resident Samuel Tunick was on his way home following a trip abroad. After landing in the US, customs agents demanded access to his Pixel phone, which was running an alternative version of Android called GrapheneOS. Rather than hand over his data, Tunick used a clever feature of the software to delete everything. Now, he’s facing federal charges.

The first hearing in this case happened last week, according to The Guardian, during which government attorneys and agents claimed that Tunick was subjected to a standard secondary interrogation at an international airport. During that encounter, agents were “looking for anything that’s prohibited.” However, Tunick’s legal team alleges he was targeted for his activism.

Tunick was involved with a group called Defend the Atlanta Forest, which opposed the construction of an enormous law enforcement training facility in the area often known as Cop City. What Tunick didn’t know, according to his lawyers, was that he’d been placed on a watch list for his actions and that Customs and Border Protection had discussed over email plans to detain him upon his arrival back in the US for “suspected terrorism activities.”

all 48 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This is a cut and dry case. They're accusing Tunick of wiping the phone to hide evidence. But by their own account, that did not happen.

The border patrol agent entered the duress code, he wiped the phone to hide evidence. When he clearly should have confiscated the phone and given it to the tech department to crack like any normal fascist police officer would do.

So, this CBP agent should be tried as a terrorist for hiding evidence. Remember, what matters are not his intentions, but his actions.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 158 points 2 days ago (1 children)

“You’re guilty because you were hiding something.”

Says people hiding their face and name.

[–] PenguinTrinity@piefed.blahaj.zone 87 points 2 days ago

Fascists doing fascist things.

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 133 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't know if this works from a legal perspective, but it certainly does from a logical perspective.

The border search exception exists so border agents can check for things that are illegal to import and prevent their importation. Erasing all the data on a storage device ensures there is nothing on it that is illegal to import, accomplishing the purported goal of the search.

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 48 points 2 days ago (2 children)

From a legal perspective, everyone has constitutional rights against the authorities going on a fishing expedition and searching you.

It's not like it's an invasive plant or something physical that our borders would be the last line of defense. The only thing on a cell phone is data. I guarantee I can get data into the US in a myriad of ways. I can even put it on a cell phone in a way that border agents would have no chance of finding.

So, although I understand that legally, these cell phone searches have not been found unconstitutional today, I think they are obviously unconstitutional. They aren't protecting our borders against something that has no other way in. It's just an unreasonable search and if we're forced to give them the unlock code, it's a violation of our right not to self-incriminate.

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago

I agree, though I'm not sure how many of the current supreme court justices would - not enough, I fear.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Courts have repeatedly ruled that Border agents have the ability to perform searches without a warrant

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yes, and my comment was about why the border search exception doesn't make sense for cell phones specifically and so it should be unconstitutional for them to search cell phones specifically.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 days ago

Not to mention our entire system of laws is based on pedantry where a comma here or misplaced word there can change the entire meaning of laws. Just because courts have ruled "routine warrantless searches" are permissible doesn't give these agents carte blanche to do as they please. Courts have also ruled that body cavity searches at the border can't be performed without a warrant or probable cause as just one example proving my point. Most of the case law mentioned here is regarding traffic stops and vehicle inspections which are far from searching through your device full of personal information and private communications.

Regardless of shitty court ruling, it should be evident to most people that this violates our Constitutional rights despite the government giving themselves permission to violate said rights.

[–] DragonAce@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

IIRC, they can only charge him with a felony if they can prove there was some sort of illegal data on his phone prior to the wipe. Otherwise they ain't got shit and I hope this guys lawyer wipes the floor with the idiotic justice dept lawyers.

[–] Reygle@lemmy.world 57 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I know MY duress PIN, and I'll fucking use it if I feel I need to. These nazis can't fucking intimidate me.

[–] Fishnoodle@lemmy.world 98 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

It sounds like they were on a fishing expedition to find anything incriminating, which has been considered illegal in pretty much every case that's come up.

You need to be looking for something specific to validate a search/get a warrant

[–] ZeroGravitas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 49 points 2 days ago

Yes, but you see, this is an airport. Law becomes very flexible in an airport: we can pull and stretch it every which way, until it does what we want.

[–] jasoman@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That was true before trump...

[–] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 78 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So based on the emails, he was always going to be detained as guilty of something...

And using the duress code to hide his sensitive data from a clearly biased adversary just gave them an easy excuse to do what they were always going to do.

[–] tacoplease@lemmy.world 25 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So based on the emails, he was always going to be detained as guilty of something...

Then they should have gotten a warrant.

[–] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 17 points 2 days ago

Why go through all the hassle of getting a warrant when you can instead coerce the person you want to detain into doing something you can label as a criminal act and detain them for that.

So much less red-tape, and you get to stomp on someone's rights in the process. Sounds like an easy win to me /s

[–] Debs@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

Hero

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 34 points 2 days ago

So pleading the fifth is a felony now?

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 38 points 2 days ago

Is there any actual evidence that evidence was destroyed? Maybe there never was any evidence for The Phone / GrapheneOS to store. Who is to say?

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 36 points 2 days ago

Nice, can't wait till Tunick wins, and then brings the civil suit for defamation.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@startrek.website 28 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Shit like this is exactly why I take a burner phone on international trips. Fuck you, you aren't getting my shit.

None of my friends really seem to get it though and always question it.

[–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago

His first mistake was going back to the US.

[+] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip -7 points 2 days ago (3 children)

A tip for those who are worried they may be in a similar situation. This is based upon training at previous jobs as well as helping journalist friends out:

Do not take a burner and do not take a blank device through a border checkpoint (what customs essentially is). You have VERY murky rights in those situations and there are plenty of legal carve outs (in many nations) to essentially throw you in a black site under suspicions. And someone having a factory reset device is right up there with "These students aren't interested in learning how to land a plane" for red flags.

If you have sensitive information on your devices? Remove that ahead of time. Look into methods where you can access it remotely (VPNing into a remote system being the easiest). You want to be able to wipe and recover your device when traveling...

Hell, even if you aren't concerned about protecting sources for a story or concealing your sexuality, it is a good "point" to reach. Because pickpockets exist and your phone could get stolen or even destroyed.

So problem solved. Wipe your phone while you are taxiing and recover it on the cab ride to your hotel! No, don't do that. Because if you get inspected you are raising ALL the alarm bells.

Instead, get into the habit of having a minimal state phone. It is one of the many reasons I discourage people from actually deleting those Facebook accounts (aside from it meaning you no longer have any "right" to images that are tagged as the numeric identity that just happens to be you...). Having a facebook account you haven't posted on in a decade but still keep to get notifications from the local parenting group is a perfectly normal thing. Having a dating app on the phone (assuming you don't have to conceal your sexuality) is a perfectly normal thing to do. Same with having a reddit or an instagram where you thirst after Benedict Cumberbatch's feet. And so forth.

Which is the reality. While this is straight bullshit... it also kinda isn't. If someone is traveling internationally with a fully wiped phone (bonus points for apparently deleting it while customs were trying to get into it...)... that is gonna put you on a watchlist and.. they probably aren't wrong to do so.

Think of your personal devices as being like your car. Some stuff you just toss on the floor of the back seat and cover with a blanket so it isn't super visible from the outside. Other stuff you just don't leave unattended in your car, period. And... if every time you borrow a car you get it fully detailed and change the upholstery... folk are gonna be wondering just how many bodies you have driven out to the desert in that.

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

If you have sensitive information on your devices? Remove that ahead of time.

That is not a reliable solution. I cannot endorse this course of action at all. The bottom line is that it is nearly impossible to actually remove all sensitive data from a phone that was in active use. Also remember, deleting files is not the same as removing them from a computer, they're still there if you know how to look. And having some of that data in the cloud makes you more vulnerable, not less. It means there's a third party to get your data from and guess what, that party already has an existing relationship and agreement with law enforcement. And even if your data were safe in the cloud, just accessing it can leave that data sitting in caches on your device in locations you may not even be able to access (but law enforcement will).

Pretending that it's possible to make a device safe is dangerous. Just take a burner.

[–] Chee_Koala@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

Your point is only valid if you trust the government, and you have a right not to trust them. A government you dont trust can use anything on your phone to put some bullshit charge on you, there is no phone, even a minimal phone, that does not have something on there they could use to pin some shit on you. I think you have to plan rules around a possible untrustworthy/fascist government while you have a normal government. Like habeus corpus, right to be forgotten, information requests, etc.

The current american government seems completely batshit insane of the rails, which is why I am using my privilege to never have to go there, to never go there. Some folk must go there, and they need basic protections against fascist rulers. I think, your point boils down to fascism-light. ' You shouldn't have incriminating stuff on there '... the only way to do that is with a burner.

[–] dadarobot@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

i find it funny when the people trying to give practical advice are downvoted just because the authorities shouldnt be able to do stuff like this.

im sure youre not saying border control should be allowed to search a phone without a warrant, youre telling peoole how to keep their info safe when you have a warrantless search take place.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Yeah... reddit is REAL stupid. And... I've increasingly come to realize that lemmy might actually be worse. People want to view the world as they want to and don't care about living in the one we are stuck in.

But, whatever. Maybe someone will see that and act accordingly. I am genuinely proud of, allegedly, having helped a fair few journalism group chats work out best practices.

... And, case in point, "you used too many words so it made me think you were acting smarter than me" is very much not information I would volunteer. And yet people do. Oy

[–] wunami@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I didn't downvote, but I found your writing style to be unnecessarily verbose. As in, the comment went on for paragraphs when the point could be made in a few sentences.

Like maybe: A completely wiped factory reset phone raises suspicions that there was something on there you wanted to hide. But a phone cleaned of sensitive data that still has all the normal benign apps and files would be less likely to get extra scrutiny.

All that extra explanation could seem/feel like you were underestimating people's intelligence.